Good evening friends, on this day of all the saints, it is a very important party

for Christians, so congratulations to all our Christian listeners, and I know that
it is a day of gathering and honoring our deceased,
but we have had to make this program to deal with the serious situation in which we
find ourselves in Spain, with that announcement already confirmed by Pedro Sánchez
before the Federal Committee,
that it is going to be processed in Parliament, the amnesty law for Catalan hitmen,
which will promote the investigation of this government with all those who are
enemies of Spain.
It is a moment in which perhaps the flags of Spain should wave half-haste and with
a black crest, and we, to honor that almost deceased, which is the Spanish nation,
we make this program, and as always, first thank those of you who are there, those
of you who accompany us in this live broadcast, and also those of you who will see
it later in deferred.
Today we are broadcasting through YouTube, through Twitch, also through Telegram,
which is a novelty, we are trying to see how the broadcast is going through
Telegram, so nothing, thank you to those of you who are there.
And as always, we bring three of our most perspicacious collaborators to help us
shed light on these times of darkness and darkness, and to help us first diagnose
what is happening, so that in this way we can know how we can defend ourselves
against these attacks that are being carried out against the Spanish nation from
the political power.
Without further ado, I introduce them, you already know them, but hey, we still
have to introduce them in case there is someone new. There you have Javier Torrocs,
who, well, I think he is one of the people who has most rigorously analyzed the
entire process of this cacique federalism, as his last book is titled, and of that
coup against the nation, as the previous book he published is titled.
And I also see that it is having more and more repercussions, that they take you,
they invite you to media, you are collaborating on programs, and I am very happy
because I think you really deserve it, because few people have analyzed this whole
situation with so much detail and so much depth. Thank you very much for continuing
to accept our invitations, Javier, and for coming here to help us understand what
is happening.
Thank you very much, Cristóbal, always for your invitation. It is a pleasure to
always be here with you and with the audience of Debates Abiertos, and also very
grateful to the readers and the rest of the media that are interested in the work
and others. Delighted, as always, to be here with you.
Perfect. Well, now we start right away and I introduce Iván Ábalos, who is from La
Rioja, he is also a regular on the channel, well, he is one of the creators of this
channel, we have been collaborators for a long time, and nothing, I also want to
listen to you, Iván, to see what light we can put on all these events that we are
experiencing these days. Welcome, Iván.
Let's hope it's a brighter light than mine, I'm sorry for the stage I have behind
me, I can't be better right now.
Well, we are going to give light and we are going to analyze the political moment
in which we live, of a seriousness that, well, is quite important with respect to
the state and the nation.
And well, since you have commented on Javier, I think it is lost, it comes from me,
which does not correspond to me, but I think that in the demonstration the other
day, I do not remember who Javier spoke of the coup to the nation, which is the
title of your book, and hey, it is not ...
Santiago Bascal, Santiago Bascal said that expression.
Santiago Bascal, it is not because I appreciate Santiago Bascal, but it is
important that the language that comes out of alternative thinkers, among them
Javier, I also include myself, I define everything in some way, but Javier, who is
the one who has made that book, it is important that it has repercussion in
politics in some way and in the political demonstration.
And no longer in the party itself, but rather that it is sinking in the people and
in the political action that in the future can also be carried out in Spanish
society.
And I always tell you that although our programs are not seen by so many people, we
do not have as many as other programs, but it is important that they know what it
is.
And I always tell you that although our programs are not seen by so many people, we
do not have as many as other programs, but we do have a lot of quality and a lot of
quality in those who listen to us.
People who have political, legal, military and other responsibilities listen to us
and I assure you that they take good note of some of the reflections that you do in
our programs.
So I think it is our job to provide tools and good diagnoses and good proposals of
what can be done and see if that is sinking into society and at some point we can
take the strength to respond to all these attacks.
I have to introduce Héctor, well, there he is from Abu Dhabi. Today we have
advanced the program a bit because with the change of time there are three hours of
difference and if not, we were going to start gossiping in the middle of the
program.
So Héctor, thank you for being there, even though it is much later than here in
Spain, and welcome and thank you for participating.
Thank you Cristobal and the colleagues for continuing to count on me on this
November 1, a blessed month that begins in Los Santos and ends in San Andrés.
And I have to thank you and apologize to the audience because the program has
advanced an hour precisely to facilitate my participation, which I thank you for.
Yes, the political events that we are seeing in Spain are one step further from the
development of the 1978 regime.
Well, let's comment and draw conclusions regarding the concept of democracy and
collective freedom, which is the editorial line of our program.
Well, very good, Héctor. Indeed, we are going to do that, we are going to deal with
each of these news, especially in the last few days, the most recent ones, and I
would like you to comment on what you are suggested by the thread of these news.
Catalonia is ready for a total reunion?
The representatives of more than 80% of Catalans support this measure, and for
these same reasons, in the name of Spain, in the interest of Spain, in defense of
coexistence between Spaniards, I defend amnesty in Catalonia today for the events
that have taken place in Catalonia.
Well, you have already seen it, in the name of Spain and for the interest of Spain,
which nobody thinks can be for their particular interest, I defend amnesty today
when we have been listening, even two days before the votes on July 23, to Pedro
Sánchez himself saying that amnesty was unfeasible, it was unnegotiable and that it
was something that was out of the Constitution and out of the law, and statements
from many others.
But hey, they have this ability to move the window of Overton and that it does not
matter what I said yesterday, because today it is the opposite, this seems that its
audience, its clientele, accepts it well.
Well, I don't know, Javier, if you want to start and tell us what you think of
these statements, by the way, the video has been cut, but then everyone looks at
each other, all the people of the Federal Committee look at each other and start
applauding and stand up in a really North Korean image of unanimity with the
leader, what the leader says is fine.
Javier, we listen to you, I'm sure you can get a lot out of these statements by
Pedro Sánchez.
Yes, thank you very much, Cristobal, precisely with the latter, which I had just
pointed out, that they look at each other and start applauding and stand up, I
think it would be interesting to make a parallelism, to establish a parallelism
between this reaction, which is not necessarily a parallelism, it is the same
reaction, it is exactly the same staging that happened very recently, also starring
El Sol.
All standing and without cracks, I repeat, without cracks, because this also
happened last November, now a year ago, when the Congress of Deputies took into
account the proposal of a reform of the criminal code that implied the derogation
of the crime of sedition.
And when the consideration was taken, the first socialist deputy who voted stood
up, the entire socialist parliamentary group stood up and she explicitly said that
the PSOE, standing and without cracks, supported the consideration of the
derogation of the crime of sedition.
Now, again, the PSOE, standing and without cracks, supports what will soon be a
bill or a bill of amnesty for the coup d'état that took place in the rebellion of
the Generalitat of Catalonia in 2017.
What has happened from my point of view? I will try to be very brief so as not to
steal time and that the rest of my colleagues can enter quickly.
In the industrial world, one of the great commercial transactions, this is sure
that Hector, who works in the oil industry, is very aware of it, there are a series
of contracts, there are a series of milestones that when each of these milestones
is fulfilled, the buyer performs what is called a down payment.
Well, here what is happening are milestones that are payments to the purchase of
the vote of the elected deputies that Carles Puigdemont has under his control.
They have occurred this week, very conveniently in the days before, as you observed
before Cristóbal, before the program began, just in the days before the
Constitutional Jury of the Princess of Asturias.
In the first place, the verbalization has occurred that there will be an amnesty or
that the PSOE will defend an amnesty soon. When making this verbalization, Pedro
Sánchez has tied himself to this idea, to this project, he can no longer go back.
Why has he done this? He has done this because Carles Puigdemont was demanding
guarantees from him, because he did not trust him, because he is a scammer, he is a
man without words, without honor, who does what suits him at all times and lacks
scruples and is willing to do anything to maintain his political position.
He has demanded a guarantee from Carles Puigdemont and this has been the guarantee.
Well, there have been three guarantees that he has given in each of the three
payments. This has been the first, the first guarantee. Pedro Sánchez verbalizes
his willingness to support an amnesty to the rebels and by verbalizing this
disposition, he has already been linked to it, it can no longer be retracted.
The second payment, the second milestone, has been the photo of the PSOE with
Carles Puigdemont in Brussels.
Now we will comment on the photo later.
The PSOE's secretary of organization takes a photo with the rebel and the PSOE
issues a statement in which it calls Carles Puigdemont a president.
To a man who is a forager, a fugitive from justice, who has fled from Spanish
justice and to whom he has gone to make pledges, to make accounts, none other than
the secretary of organization of the Socialist Party.
This and Cabo Cristobal have been the three payments, the three milestones of
payment of the contract by which Pedro Sánchez buys the votes of the elected
deputies who are under the control of the outlawed coup rebel, Carles Puigdemont.
Thank you very much, Javier. Well explained those milestones. Then we are going to
enter the subject of that meeting of Santos Zerdán, the secretary of organization
of the PSOE.
We are going to listen first to Iván and Héctor, what they have to comment on that
announcement made on Saturday, passed by Pedro Sánchez before the Federal Committee
of the PSOE.
Go ahead, Iván. What do you want to add to what Javier has already said about that
announcement, that confirmation that the amnesty law is indeed going to be passed?
Yes, I am going to be a little more theoretical because I think I am not going to
contradict anything that Javier has said. It seems to me an intervention with which
I totally agree.
I am going to refer a little to what politicians always use to shield themselves in
all their acts, and that is that general interest.
Although it sounds very beautiful, very poetic, very idealistic, very beautiful in
the prose of the famous writer Jacques Dussopt, but it is a concept in which the
greatest murderers,
the greatest tyrants in recent history, under general interest, for example, took
refuge in the Nazi regime, took refuge in the fascists, took refuge in Napoleon,
took refuge in the time of terror even of Robespierre.
The general interest is what blames all the politicians of the acts. The same
Catalan separatist politicians shielded themselves in that they are a consequence
of the general interest that had sprung up in Catalonia, that all the acts were
that.
They were not guilty, they simply acted and obeyed that general interest. And Pedro
Sánchez is now also shielding himself in that general interest, which I think he
names it like that in the video, the general interest.
He is, and what the amnesty is going to do is the general interest of the Spanish
nation and of the Spaniards. He does it for us, but he is even the representative
of that general interest.
This dark idea, however beautiful it may be, is a totally dark idea and it is not
possible to determine. It is metaphysical, it is something that floats in the air
and that is simply in the theory and in the ideology of contemporary regimes.
Gerard Leifholt, the great theorist of partyocracy, who defended partyocracy, said
that all the crimes and corruptions of the state parties are crimes and corruptions
of the people who vote them.
This goes in that sense, precisely, in addition, Gerard Leifholt, who speaks of the
general interest of Yass Rousseau and that Yass Rousseau, that partyocracy was a
culmination, a kind of culmination of his theory, and that Yass Rousseau himself
could not imagine either.
That he could, the parties, let's say, convey that general interest, but that it
was congruent with the theory of Rousseau.
So, of course, that phrase of Gerard Leifholt is not a reality. That phrase of
Gerard Leifholt is saying that Hitler is a consequence of the Nazi German people
and that the politicians, the German politicians, did not have any kind of guilt.
That irresponsibility of politicians is the greatest damage that can be for a
nation. And that is the biggest problem we have in Spain, it is the
irresponsibility of politicians that will culminate in a way that makes it visible,
that irresponsibility.
Because, after all, all these political and corrupt criminals are pardoned and in
this case they are amnestied. Because their action is typical of the general
interest and the politicians are not to blame.
And if there was a law that said A, if the politicians did B, it is because that
law is no longer up-to-date and must be changed. Well, I'm going to stay here, but
just to finish, the force of the general interest that forces an amnesty because
the amnesty denies, let's say, the legal political order that was established,
is a prelude, and with this I am repeating myself because I said it in a previous
program, it is a prelude to a constitutional process in which we are. And the group
of amnestied politicians is undeniably part of the constitutional group that is
going to make and carry out that constitutional process.
Because it is going to be under the foundations of that group, embracing the
general interest in which that group is shielded to come out airy, and therefore,
as a consequence, the political acts as a consequence of saving that group go along
the line that that group defends,
which is a Catalan independent political subject, a non-unitary Spain, and so on.
So, well, I'm getting ahead of myself, maybe a lot, but I'm going to leave it here.
So, the nature of these acts goes in that direction. These acts have that nature,
marked by the group of Catalan separatist, delinquent and corrupt politicians who
have found complicity in the government and in the strongest political bloc that
governs Spain right now.
Thank you, Iván. Then there will be an occasion for you to go deeper into this
interesting issue, which has already been discussed in other programs, but which we
must continue to insist on, because these are issues that need to be reflected on,
because we always draw new conclusions.
We are going to listen to Héctor to see what he thinks of this announcement by
Sánchez, and then we will go into other events, into other milestones, as Javier
said, that have happened in recent days. Go ahead, Héctor, we are listening to you.
Yes, well, what I'm going to do is go a little deeper into the analysis that my
colleagues have already done, which is what the latter always has to talk about.
Javier Torros has talked about bought votes. Yes, of course, this is nothing more
than a consequence of the development of the 1978 regime.
Let us remember that in the 1978 regime, Spaniards do not have the right to elect
our president of the government, but the only thing that citizens can do by voting
is to distribute power quotas among the heads of the different political parties,
which will be the ones who will later make the closed-door agreements that they
deem necessary and without giving anyone an account to elect the president of the
government.
Several agreements could be drawn up to elect the president of the government, but
it seems that the one that is at the head and seems to be going to get ahead is
Sánchez's agreement with Puigdemont's party, which I don't even remember what it's
called now.
They will change it again, in addition to the issue of summing up the Basque
nationalists, Proletarras and all these people.
Because the 1978 regime did not establish the instruments to guarantee neither the
fulfillment of the constitution itself nor the unity of the Spanish nation.
In other words, the founding fathers of 1978 did not establish any kind of control
over the political power of the oligarchy, and therefore the oligarchy camped at
its width by changing the legality to their convenience.
There is no court that can give constitutional dictates worthy of such a name of
whether a thing is constitutional or not. Simply, the judges who have to determine
that are appointed by the oligarchy itself and if they want to guarantee their
career and their permanence in office, they have to do what they are ordered to do.
Therefore, there is no guarantee.
The video that we have seen is very important. Pedro Sánchez says, pay close
attention to what he is saying. Don Antonio taught us to read and to fight, to
listen.
He says, it is the majority desire of the people of Catalonia. Pay close attention
to the content of the phrase. He is going to be elected president of the government
because that is the majority will, he says, of the people of Catalonia.
In other words, the majority will of the people of Catalonia can be allowed
anything, such as being president, or achieving independence, or separating the
house from social security.
For example, in that phrase of Sánchez is where there is really the betrayal of the
Spanish nation.
Iván has spoken of the concept of general interest. Yes, whenever a politician
speaks of general interest, it is because he is trying to justify the unjustified.
I will not repeat how Iván has explained the concept because he has explained it
well.
It is something that does not exist. What does exist is the will or the majority
interest of the Spanish people. There is no general will or general interest. And
it is precisely what politicians do not fulfill.
When a politician speaks of general interest, it is because he is going against the
majority interest of the nation, which is the one that does exist. What is the
underlying reason why politicians can do this?
Every time there are elections or every time they need some kind of agreement.
Well, let's remember, this kind of thing is not the first time it happens. Equality
was charged between men and women, in Spain it is legally discriminated against for
gender reasons, and the gentlemen who had to lay down the law said it was
constitutional.
This is not the first time it happens, nor much less. What happens is that now it
is even more scandalous than the last time, but this is nothing more than the same.
There is nothing new in the development of the 78 regime.
Why can politicians do this? Politicians can do this because there were a lot of
people who went to vote in the last elections. And since there were a lot of people
who went to vote in the last elections, most of the Spanish people, in addition to
not electing a president of the government, what they are doing is legitimizing the
current electoral and constitutional system.
That governs the Spanish state. To delegitimize the political caste that does and
undoes at will, there is no choice but to not go to vote, but to legitimize
themselves.
And it does not enter our heads. But as long as we continue to vote, we already
vote for VOX, we already vote for the Popular Party, we already vote for the
Spanish Party, we already vote to add whatever, the main and almost only thing we
are doing is to legitimize these actions that politicians take behind the people.
As they said, it is not the first time. Aznar, when he won in 1996 for Los Peros to
Felipe González, has to deliver education and health to Jordi Puyol, and he could
not think of anything else to say than that he spoke Catalan in the entity.
And every time it has been necessary, something like this has been done. This is
nothing new. What happens is that it started by delivering health care, it
continued to give armed forces to autonomous communities, etc.
And in the end, we have already come to overthrow the crime of sedition. For
example, nothing really happens either, because when the time comes, if there is
another agreement on the other hand, they can be accused either of betrayal or
rebellion, because this cause could have been instructed by rebellion, and we would
continue the same.
Well, we do not launch the bells on the fly, because this is not more than the
same, but the politician will always keep levers to do whatever he wants, if it is
the opposite of what he has done so far, at a certain time.
Let's not think that this has no solution or has no turning back, of course it
does, what happens is that the interests of the politician are not aligned with the
majority interest of the Spanish people, and that is the problem.
But come on, I finish now, this is the usual, of the power in Spain, in the 78
regime, they have seized a meal of 6 or 7 people, heads of political parties, and
there they do, they undo, one wants to put one in jail one day, the other wants to
get him out, and according to the power quotas that the people distribute and the
agreements they make between them,
one goes to jail, or they let him escape, or they amnesty him, or whatever, but
this is more of the same, and the people to pay taxes, to shut up, and to vote
every four years, I do not know very well here.
Thank you very much Hector, well, notice that only with that first video, the one
about things that you have already said, and the ability that you have had to join
it with issues of authentic depth, of the nature of this regime, and how the power
self-indulges and is never guilty of anything, what happens in the end is the will,
the general interest, in short, that is why they can change.
I am going to put that image of that milestone that Javier Torros mentioned in his
intervention, if you can, José, there it is, well, that is the meeting of Santos
Zerdán, secretary of organization of the PSOE, with the fugitive Puigdemont,
president, in the words of PSOE officials, he is no longer a fugitive,
who is also a man who has the bad luck and the cunning to meet in an office where
he has put the famous photo with the urn of that illegal consultation, this photo
was put in an exhibition, I think, in the European Parliament, and the European
Parliament forced him to withdraw it,
well, he has put it there in an office that I suppose they have, and he has had the
cunning and the form of humiliation to meet there at the papanatas of the PSOE,
although the PSOE and its affine media have already taken care of it, which are
practically all, starting with Spanish radio and television, of cutting the image,
putting it down so that the humiliation of Puigdemont is not seen, that you have to
recognize a sense of humor.
Malefic and evil, but of course he has it, putting the other under that photo and
also pointing it out. Well, surely with this milestone of how Puigdemont has
already become president, honorable, and that meeting at the highest level, before
they were secret media, now it is public,
Sánchez's announcement was on Saturday before the Federal Committee, this was made
public on Monday, before yesterday's act of the Constitutional Jury by Princess
Leonor, and well, surely as a result of this milestone you also have many questions
to comment on,
I would also like you to talk about how this Overton window is moving, some have
already cited it, as it was first those general indulgences, where by the way I
think that in the report of the indulgences it was said, well, that there had to be
indulgences because amnesty could not be done legally, but now yes, now we have
reached a point where amnesty, Illa said it the other day, constitutional amnesty,
the adjective of amnesty was constitutional,
it is a constitutional amnesty, in case there were doubts, in short, Javier, who
has been the first to intervene, then comment on this photo as a result, because
whatever you want, if you want to delve into something that the colleagues have
said, then go ahead, we use this as an excuse for you to actually say what you
think is most appropriate, go ahead Javier.
Thank you very much Cristóbal, well, yes, precisely, I do it again as before and I
take the thread again with the last thing you commented on, with this that Salvador
Illa has said, the first secretary of the PSC and Fausto, Minister of Health,
former Minister of Health, this constitutional amnesty.
In the 78 regime, it is very common for the verbalization of a concept to magically
create that concept, to transform it into a reality, Mr. Illa affirms that amnesty
has a constitutional character, making constitutional the adjective that modifies
the noun amnesty, constitutional amnesty,
and already through this sortilegio, he has already made the amnesty within the
framework of the constitution of 78, simply verbalizing it, in the same way that,
as Hector said before, he called Hector's attention to what Pedro Sánchez had said
in his intervention before the federal executive of the PSOE,
that he had said that the realization of an amnesty to the rebels of the
Generalitat was the majority desire of the people of Catalonia, evidently this is
something that Pedro Sánchez does not know and that no one knows, what is the
majority desire of the people of Catalonia, but he simply materializes it verbally
and in that way, by art of Birli Birloche, as in a magical spell, he turns it into
a reality that,
the media quotes and repeat it as a reality, they do not say Pedro Sánchez affirms
that, but that the media constantly make distribution mail and with the quotation
marks, they assume that the content of that quotation mark is a reality, they do
not question the words of anything, they simply accept that if someone who is in
power,
who is in power, who holds power, who is invested in power, makes a statement about
any issue, the mere affirmation of that issue turns it into a reality, for example,
if Pedro Sánchez comes out saying that it is raining, even if it is sunny, the
media will quote that it is raining, because the power has said it.
This catches my attention a lot, something that I would also like to emphasize is,
going deeper into this quote that Hector also pointed out, that of the majority
desire of the Catalan people, the meaning, I am very interested in the meaning of
this quote, because as Hector has said, this is of an enormous transcendence, what
it contains.
First of all, the mention of the people of Catalonia as a different entity,
differentiated from the Spanish people, as if the people of Catalonia were
something that is not part of the Spanish people, when we all know that Catalonia
without Spain does not exist or is nothing.
The Catalan being is a form, like any other, of being Spanish, as is the Bursian
being, or the extreme being, or the being of La Rioja or Cuenca, being Spanish is
being Spanish regardless of the place of Spain in which you were born or in which
you are in the neighborhood.
But I go further, when he speaks of the majority desire of the people of Catalonia,
what is Mr. Sánchez saying here?
What he is saying is that he, who is the executive power and will be, still in
office, but who intends to be soon the executive power, he is going to promote,
through a bill or he is going to urge the courts to write a bill of amnesty to the
rebels for the coup d'état of 2017.
When he says that it is the majority desire of the people of Catalonia and that
because of that desire of the majority he is going to implement this law, what he
is saying is that a majority of the people of Catalonia is the one that imposes on
the whole of Spain, by its will, this amnesty.
That since that majority of the Catalan people wants that amnesty, the whole of the
Spanish people is forced to accept that amnesty.
I don't know if I can translate what I want to say.
This is exactly the materialization of what Miquel Iceta said in the Tribune of
Speakers of the Parliament of the Generalitat of Catalonia on September 6, 2017.
Javier, can you repeat what you have said?
Yes, what I want to say is that this affirmation that the implementation of the
amnesty law responds to the majority desire of the people of Catalonia is the
materialization of something that Miquel Iceta said in the Tribune of Speakers on
September 6, 2017, the day the coup began.
When the Catalan regional parliament approved the referendum law in which it was
stated that Catalonia was a sovereign political subject.
That day, throughout the day, the different debates that took place, the different
interventions that took place, the different times that Miquel Iceta intervened, in
one of them, from the Tribune of Speakers, he affirmed that his personal desire and
that of the PSC,
and let's not forget that the PSC is the one who controls Pedro Sánchez, because
Pedro Sánchez owes his position within the organigram of the Socialist Party to the
votes of the PSC, Miquel Iceta said, I go back to this, that his own desire and
that of the PSC was to return to the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia those
elements that had been eroded by the sentence of the Constitutional Court
in 2010, and that reforms would be carried out later in the Constitution of 1978 so
that the Constitution would adapt to that content of the Statute of Catalonia that
had been, in his words, eroded by the sentence of the Constitutional Court.
This, in a deep, intimate way, what it means is that Catalonia be the constituent
power of Spain, that Catalonia be the one who has the capacity to impose on the
entire Spanish nation the legal framework, the political framework in which the
life of the Spanish political nation is developed.
This, in summary, is to establish that the Spanish constituent power is an
exclusive privilege of the Catalan citizens.
Well, thank you, Javier, we will continue listening to you because, of course, I do
not stop learning and seeing what way you have to analyze with accuracy the words
and the facts.
Iván, I think you had a video out there that you wanted to show because it was
precisely about this that was being discussed now.
Let's see, if you want my intervention, I made a somewhat comical video, a live
scene in theory a few weeks ago, and it is as it is happening.
In fact, the other day they called Mr. President, I do not know how it is said in
Catalan, Puigdemont, two weeks ago.
And with this I also want to emphasize that in this video we can say something new,
but in essence we have already said it in previous programs.
If nothing is happening that we have not already pointed out in previous programs,
you can go to the program after the elections.
It is that under the analysis that we are having, we are seeing how what we have
said from the beginning is practically being fulfilled, since he won the elections,
so to speak.
So, I made this video two weeks ago, and you are going to see how two weeks ago
things have happened, yes, but if you want to put it, it will last two minutes, and
my intervention would consist of this, then I will try to intervene again.
Oh, the reference.
No.
No.
Yes.
Sheldon, come on back.
Yes.
Yes.
What did you decide?
I'll give your paper to Professor Hawking.
Great.
Thank you.
Oh, that's terrific.
But in exchange, I'd like you to do a few things for me.
What kinds of things?
Are you familiar with the 12 labors of Hercules?
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
Thank you, I'm sorry.
We have seen continuously with the king, protocolary actions, that have been a lack
of respect
for the protocol and what the protocol requires.
So, Sánchez's ambition is that.
The ambition of Catalan politicians is to save their asses from justice and, as
Javier
Torres has said very well, to lead Spain and benefit.
Here, these are more of an economic interest, but also political, because they want
to be
a constituent subject, independent of Spain itself.
I think this is a little different from what Javier has said, but to lead Spain.
I don't think they want to become independent of Spain, but yes, to the point of
being considered
an indifferent political subject to Spain, and that is what they want to achieve,
which was already
implicit in the Catalan statute, which is why the Constitutional Court threw it
away.
Because they say, those who go against the sentence of the Constitutional Court,
they say that
the Andalusian statute was not thrown away and it is practically the same.
No, the Catalan statute has references to Catalonia as a different political
subject
from the rest of Spain.
If I remember correctly.
Let's see if you can refresh my memory.
Yes, if you allow me, with the issue of the content of the Catalan statute, what
the
Constitutional Court ruled was the unconstitutionality, if I remember correctly, of
a single article
and established the interpretation that had to be given to another number of
articles, I don't remember which ones,
but only one article was annulled, if I remember correctly, of the Catalan statute
of 2006,
which was the article that established a Catalan justice council, which was a
council
general of the judicial power of Catalonia, the establishment of a judicial power
exclusively
Catalan, of course, that was going to be controlled by the Generalitat of
Catalonia, of course, if they control the judges
who are going to judge you, well, you live very calm, as it usually happens to the
young man, who lives very
calm because he controls the judges who are going to judge him, and if from time to
time the
trapeze of the atrocity they have done is so calm that they have no choice but to
condemn him,
well, nothing happens because they indulge him, as they are going to do now with
Mr. Piñán, and of course, it seems very
important to me what Iván was commenting on before about the ambition of power,
just a second,
Iván, and I shut up, what you were commenting about the ambition of power that
Pedro Sánchez is capable of
even of carrying out violations of protocol with the king, but of course, that more
than ambition of power, I
think it is something that you have said very well, something sick, because it is
not reasonable that the
president of the government may intend to occupy the space of the head of state,
who is a king,
when he is not a king, nor can he be, nor will he be, evidently, I think, I have
said it
before, that Pedro Sánchez, more than ambition of power, what he has is a crazy
vanity,
a crazy vanity and a desire for attention, sick, that he needs to be the center of
attention
constantly, to have the light and the focus exclusively on himself, to be applauded
only by him,
because he is the power, why does he want it if he does nothing with him, if he
really had ambition of
power, he would crush the separatists without contemplation, someone who has
ambition of
power would not tolerate a single moment that a Meke XIII like Carles Puigdemont
could defy his
power, he would crush it without contemplation, especially in 2019, when he had the
perfect opportunity
to create a state of exception, a state of place even when all the separatists
were throwing doquines and even within the separatist environment, he rekindled
that action,
let's remember that ETA fell for the murder of Miguel Ángel Blanco, that is, ETA
collapsed when they went too far, Pedro Sánchez had the opportunity to take
advantage of those
illegitimate acts within Catalan separatism itself, to set up a state of exception,
call it the site or whatever, and have a fairly hard policy there and well, go for
Tsunami Democratic, for the CDR and for all that separatist environment that
somehow
was there. Now, where has it ended? Because if you see the communication of
Esquerra
Republicana on the pacts that the PSOE has produced, Esquerra Republicana details,
details that ...
Now we go into that, Iván, if you think ...
Yes, I was just going to say that I was simply going to indulge, that is, to
amnesty also to all that
environment against which I could carry and go for them just four years ago, in
2019, and not just ...
Ivan, if you think so, leave it there because we are going to enter that topic now,
I am going to give the
floor to Héctor, who has not intervened in this block and has told me that he did
not have more to
add to everything that you have commented on. So, what you say, we are going to
join it with
that solemn act of the Constitutional Jury by the heir to the throne, the Princess
of Asturias,
César Leonor. Here I see that the times, of course, are handled well by Sánchez and
the PSOE,
because he has taken the opportunity to make all these announcements of the amnesty
and, in between,
this institutional act is placed, which gives an image of continuity of the regime,
and then,
surely, next week, the amnesty is produced. In addition, just on the same day of
the
Constitutional Jury, almost at night, this news came out, which before José took us
out,
take it out now if you want, of all that which includes the pact with Esquerra,
right? Before we have
talked about the pact with Puigdemont, because now it seems that of Esquerra, where
the amnesty is also included
to Tsunami and to the CDRs, that is, to crimes that are classified, some of
terrorism and others of
corruption, malversation, etc. Héctor, I would like you to comment on that act of
the Constitutional Jury
for Princess Leonor and how it gets in the middle of all these other events and
with what
objective do you think it is? And that other milestone, apart from the ones we have
already commented on, which would be
that pact also with Esquerra, including all these other crimes in that amnesty. Go
ahead, Héctor, we are listening to you.
Yes, thank you Cristóbal. Well, yesterday, the 18th birthday of His Royal Highness
Princess Leonor,
she did the same thing that her father did in 1986, to reach the age of majority,
to swear the
Constitution. It is fundamentally a protocol act, but it is also currently already
a
thing only protocol, for what reason? Because the regime of 78 has already
degenerated so much, we are
so used to hearing one thing and then seeing the opposite, a oath of the
Constitution
of the heir to the crown of Spain. It means absolutely nothing and what has caught
our attention the most
is the white suit of the girl and that she did not wear a shirt like the one I wear
underneath.
But nothing else, that is, a protocol and an emptiness of meaning. That is another
evolution of the regime of 78 and of the
monarchy itself. One day, King Felipe decides to go out there in 2017 and make a
very hard speech
on the subject of Catalan separatism by amending the plan to Mariano Rajoy. That
is, before the
inaction of the government, it was when the king came out and that day the throne
was won in front of Spain.
A throne that is on the verge of losing because it has not been able to maintain
with its actions the speech of the 17th.
And that is what is behind that lack of meaning of yesterday's act.
That is, when the delegitimization of the regime of 78 reaches the monarchy, it is
the monarchy itself and not necessarily the rest of the framework of the regime of
78 that is at risk.
Faced with a regime crisis, it is very possible that Pedro Sánchez wants to sell a
republic defined as the absence of a king as the solution to the regime crisis
caused by the same politicians of the regime of 78.
You do not agree, Javier.
Now that they comment, you finish your presentation.
The monarchy must be above the politicians, which means that it must even be above
the constitution. Let us remember that Juan Carlos did not swear it.
What does this mean? That the monarchy should not link its future to the continuity
of the constitution of 78.
Because the constitution of 78 is so bad that it is obviously temporary. And it is
a mistake of the monarch to link the monarchy to the fidelity of the constitution,
to the continuity of the constitution.
Because when the constitution changes, then the monarchy will be at risk. One thing
is to fulfill its constitutional duties, which it is not doing, and another thing
is to link the constitution of the monarchy to the existence of the current
constitution and nothing else.
The monarchy, to be permanent, must be linked to the permanent. And the permanent
here is the Spanish nation, not the current Spanish state, not the constitution.
And that is where the king shot in the year 17. And that is the path from which he
has withdrawn. And that is the great problem of the monarchy of Spain.
Returning to analyze the words of Pedro Sánchez, in the speech of Pedro Sánchez
yesterday, when he delivered the order of Carlos III, he says, you count on the
loyalty of the government.
He must have had a chill on his back to the king.
But who are you to declare loyalty to the king of Spain in the name of the
government, the executive power of Spain? In fact, when he is pronouncing that
phrase, he says, you count on the support of the government.
What Pedro Sánchez is saying is, today I give you my loyalty, but tomorrow I can
take it away from you, because I am explicitly declaring that you have my loyalty.
A president of the government who is really loyal to the Spanish crown should not
make explicit that the government is loyal to the Spanish crown. It is already
assumed. If it is not, you cannot be there.
This is the true importance of Sánchez's speech yesterday. The system of the 78 is
caught with pins.
And well, this comes from those who made the constitution, from the fathers of the
constitution. What did they do? Well, a silly and mere copy of the German
constitution. And what is the German constitution based on? Well, on German law,
based on German idealism.
That is, pure formalism. The other day they criticized me on another internet
channel because I had said in an open debate program that there are no
representatives in the parliament in Spain. And they wrote to me, hey, read the
constitution because the constitution says there are representatives.
That's where ignorance comes from. That is, that is precisely the error of the
constitution. Not because of the fact of writing that there are representatives, it
means that there are.
But so that a law is fulfilled, the legal system itself has to provide the
necessary instruments so that that law can be fulfilled. And if not, the law is not
fulfilled.
If the king has the function of arbitration among the political forces, the king
has to have explicit and clear the tools, the necessary instruments to be able to
exercise that mission, that function of arbitration. And the constitution does not
give them.
The king, in the year 17, without any legal instrument, withdrew from legitimacy.
He was elected representative of the majority interest of the Spanish nation. Just
what has been withdrawn in later years, he will know why.
This is the problem of Spain and the Spanish monarchy.
In short, there it is, there it is all said. She is the heir of the constitution,
not of the Spanish monarchy.
I am very struck by what you just said about the ABC cover. Something that the
Syrian friend of the Bosque order also commented on Twitter, making a comment on
that ABC cover, he said in La Diana, always the constitution, never Spain.
And I wonder why, why this obsession with the constitution and this obsession to
hide that the nation is prior to the constitution, that without a nation there is
no possible constitution.
And I am, I subscribe practically everything that Héctor has commented on in his
previous intervention. The only point where I do feel is in the possibility that
Pedro Sánchez promotes the change of a change of model of state, of monarchy to
republic.
I am very skeptical about it. I think the shots go wrong for the federal project
that José Antonio Zarzalejos and Manuel Cruz established in that article that they
published on the confidencial.com and that they titled the hour of the king for a
federal monarchy.
That is, a monarchy in which the king continues to have his crown, but that his
role is even more blurred and that once concluded, as we have already said so many
times here in debates open to television, once the distribution of the state's cuts
is concluded, the distribution of the cuts of the nation begins and that this is
what gives rise to the final federalization, material,
of Spain. The objective, the development of the Spanish constitution, the objective
of all political actors in Spain for the development of the constitution is only
one.
The maintenance of its clientele networks. This is achieved through the
multiplication of charges and through the multiplication of budgets, control of
spending, control of money, having money to distribute and with which to buy votes.
This is what materially drives federalization, in addition to the political impulse
that the Spanish constitution itself imprints on this federalizing process.
But I would like to return to what Héctor commented about the constitution jury on
the part of the honor girls and the constitution jury that Felipe also did when he
turned 80.
Here there is a point that is fundamental to which Héctor referred and that is that
the crown, if it binds its future to that of the constitution, is dictating its own
death sentence. Because the constitution is going to be finite, it is going to have
a finite life, it is not going to be eternal or immortal, it is going to have a
life, it is going to die and we will see what happens next.
We already know what the bad guys are projecting, let's see if we, the good guys,
manage to establish political freedom and the free election of the government and
the natural representatives of the governed in two separate elections through two
separate sessions.
That is another issue, where I am going is the issue of the binding of the crown to
the constitution. The constitution is going to die, it is a mistake on the part of
the crown to bind its future to that of the regime.
Héctor has made a very timely observation regarding the jury and it is that Juan
Carlos never came to swear the constitution. Yes, he swore the fundamental
principles of the movement of the dictatorship of General Franco, but later, when
the constitution was enacted, he did not swear loyalty to the constitution.
I agree with Héctor that it is a mistake for the king to swear loyalty to the
constitution and I am going to say why. I believe that the constitution establishes
that the heir, when he reaches the age of maturity, has to swear loyalty to the
constitution.
I believe that this is a very important mistake, not of the constituents of the
editors of the constitution, but a mistake towards the monarchy, that the monarchy
would have accepted that or that the monarchy would not move threads in the shade
to modify that, for the reasons that Héctor has exposed.
If it is linked to the constitution, the monarchy can end with the term of the
constitution. And I am going to give another point to justify that this is not the
case and why I consider it a mistake to swear loyalty to the constitution.
The king is not a constituted power, which is what the constitution contains, and
he is not a constituting power either, which is the political force that creates
the constitution. If it is not a constituted power and it is not a constituting
power, the king is something else.
If he swears loyalty to a constituted power, the king is swearing loyalty and
linking his future, as Héctor has rightly said, to the future of the thing to which
he has sworn loyalty.
He is setting a game, not only his crown, but the dynasty. And let's not forget,
let's always keep in mind what are the objectives that a king always has in mind.
The king has a colossal political objective, always present, every day, every day
of the week, every day of the year.
From the moment he gets up until he goes to bed, which is the permanence of the
crown in his harem and the succession in his heir. That's all a king cares about
right now.
And the king, the only thing he has in mind is that I have to do whatever is
necessary to ensure the maintenance of the crown and the maintenance of my dynasty,
that is, that my heir Leonor, when the time comes, inherits the crown and becomes
queen of Spain.
But swearing loyalty to the constitution very seriously compromises that future,
from my point of view. Very seriously. Because in fact, the regime, I think it is
something that is visible to everyone, it has the days counted, we do not know how
long it will last.
We have said it here many times for years, the regime of 78 is dead, it only takes
the gravedigger to give it a grave. This is not indefinitely sustainable.
And if the monarchy intends to continue, the only means by which it could have
continuity once the regime of 78 is finished would be to link its future to that of
the Spanish political nation.
That is the only means by which there could be hope of having continuity in Spain.
Because if there is any trace of utility in the monarchical institution, it is that
of maintaining the unity and integrity of the political nation.
If the monarchy is not capable, it is not useful to carry out that task, then the
monarchy is a nuisance that will have to be destroyed, just as the regime of 78
will have to be destroyed.
If the monarchy is not capable, it is not useful to carry out that task, then the
monarchy is a nuisance that will have to be destroyed, just as the regime of 78
will have to be destroyed.
That is the environment I am talking about, which Pedro Sánchez had the opportunity
to face in 2019, in the face of those vandalic, violent acts, that violent
revolution that we lived in 2019 after the decision of the Supreme Court of the
sentence of sedition on the part of the Supreme Court.
And all that attempt to intimidate in some way, but also let's say that there
independence lost legitimacy because of those violent acts, when they were
defending being peaceful and all that.
So, when the most violent part of all this independentist movement came out, I
think that Pedro Sánchez had a tremendous opportunity to end that and now to take
the path that Javier has referred to before, in the end what he is going to do is
amnesty us.
That is what I wanted to say. With reference to what my colleagues have commented,
because it is the closest thing that catches me from the debate, in reference to
the king who did not swear the constitution, obviously, is that the king sanctioned
it.
Why? Because the constitution is the eighth fundamental law of the kingdom, of the
franchism. So, the king already swore the fundamental laws, he does not have to
swear the constitution. The king of Spain, Juan Carlos.
So, that is the reason and that clearly indicates, indicates the origin of the
regime called 78, which is nothing more than a continuation, a reform of the Franco
regime. At what point did he stop swearing the fundamental laws of the franchism?
Well, obviously, in that same transition, the need to homologate Europe and leave
behind the franchism was highlighted, but not to leave behind the franchism as long
as it reforms the franchism, but to leave behind everything that could be
identified with the franchism.
And then the constitution became that substitute for the fundamental laws of the
kingdom, and when the father of Leonor, the current king of Spain, Felipe VI, being
a prince and in the act he had on his 18th birthday, the speech that is the same,
traced, the oath of Felipe, which is traced, the oath of Leonor, traced, not
verified, and it is traced,
he swore the constitution. And he says, he says, said yesterday Leonor and said the
king Felipe, who literally swears, I'm not going to say it, but I have it pointed
out here, more or less, also with some development that I do, swears to faithfully
perform his functions, and those functions, I divided them,
I see or conclude that I divided them into three pillars, which constitute the
basis of the Spanish political order, its function of making and keeping the
constitution, okay, but let's go to those three pillars, okay?
Which is the rights of individuals, of citizens, and the rights of autonomous
communities, the rights of citizens and the rights of autonomous communities.
Something that seems to me absolutely contradictory, or the rights of citizens or
the rights of autonomous communities.
Because we all know that the French Revolution is the one that implements the
rights of citizens and is based on the citizen and citizens break with all kinds of
privileges and territorial rights to give, to put the citizen as a central axis to
which the policy is directed.
And we all know that the departments of the French provinces draw lines with rule
and cardboard, carrying all those territories that naturally during the Middle Ages
had been formed, and based on the fact that the capital of those provinces, which
are government delegations to be present throughout the territory,
the people, the most distant population to that government delegation located in
the capital of the province, has to be one hour away, regardless of the fact that
previously that population would have been historically linked to that capital.
Therefore, the historical, regional territory, and here it does not matter, here
what is given is the primacy to the citizen. I am talking about the birth of the
political nation seen from the contemporary point of view.
And at the end of the day, in which today we continue to live under that paradigm.
However, here you have to give rights to autonomous communities, to territories.
And when you give a right to territories, you are putting many times above the
territory of a citizen.
And you are subverting, or you are putting that territory above the rights of
citizens. In addition to those two pillars, which is for the monarchy the political
order, the monarchy obviously puts itself as a pillar, and that is why it says that
another of its functions is its fidelity to the king, because the king would be
that other pillar.
Therefore, for the royal house, the monarchy, the pillars of the political order
are the citizens, the autonomous communities, and the monarchy. Obviously, they
will not escape them.
So, what I want to say with this is that, and I think my colleagues have mentioned
it before, the positioning of the monarchy, currently, and for several decades, is
absolutely accepting the political order that arose with the regime of 1978, and
that is leading us to this disaster.
The Spanish constitution itself is leading us to this disaster, because it is a
participant, and everything that is happening now is a logical consequence of that
constitution and that political order implanted in the regime of 1978.
I wanted to comment that, in addition, and it is something that was also heard,
perhaps it came from before, but it was also heard in the investigation of 2020,
when they investigated Pedro Sánchez in January 2020, Felipe's speech in Congress
spoke of the general interests.
Before he spoke of the general interest, because according to the Arbusol theory,
when there is a society, a nation, there is a general interest. That plurality,
those general interests, already denote or mark or accept, in some way, the
plurinationality of Spain.
They are things that are done with the language that they implicitly carry in the
discourse of the monarchy, the Spanish plurinationality. Therefore, the monarchy,
today, I see it contrary to the interests of the nation.
Javier Torres has said before that if it is not to defend the nation, then it is
something to destroy, as are the rest of the enemies of the nation that today are
in the Spanish political class.
And well, then I did not see any inclusive language in Leonor's speech, I did not
see any inclusive language, nor did I see that she spoke in other languages within
her speech that were not Spanish or any co-official language, of the co-officials
that exist in Spain.
Which is what Francine Armengol did, who put Calzador, including three authors in
her speech, of Basque, Galician and Valencian-Catalan origin, putting Calzador,
putting Calzador, quotes from these three people speaking in those co-official
languages.
Why? Well, because this is also marking an intention that we already saw, because
Francine Armengol herself, a month or so ago, already announced that in the
Congress of Deputies she was going to speak in those languages.
So, what I am seeing here is a constant, perhaps Francine Armengol with more
commitment, obviously, coming from PSOE than the Princess of Asturias, but what I
see here is an acceptance of a fully plurinational state, which obviously even
comes from the Constitution itself, which has cured.
So, I, from that act, what did I see? Well, from that act I saw a pure act of the
1978 regime, and the monarchy, it seems to me, a monarchy absolutely isolated,
absolutely on the line of those pillars of the 1978 regime, where she herself, the
monarchy, wants to be, and there is no doubt that she is part of that regime.
She is neither above nor below, she wants to be there and be one more pillar, as
the autonomous communities are, and they say the citizens, but I am going to say
the true pillar of the 1978 regime.
The true pillar of the 1978 regime is the parties, because that reform of
Francoism, which is the 1978 regime, is a reform that transitioned from a regime of
a single party, or personal, of Franco, personalist, in a regime of caudillo, in a
regime of parties, where instead of a caudillo there were going to be a few
caudillos who were the leaders of the parties.
And those leaders of the parties are the ones who today have the constituent power
in Spain, which are the constituted powers. And they, and the fate of Spain, if it
is not finished with the regime of the State, or with this party-political order,
will be the ones who will have the power of the fate of the State and possibly also
of the Spanish nation.
So, well, with this also that it serves a little, because I take a little out of
the monarchy to have the ability to have some ... Obviously, the monarchy has the
possibility of doing things, I already said it in the previous program, it can
play, it can, but it will not conclude anything.
None of its decisions or any contradiction that it makes with its political acts to
the parties, or to what Pedro Sánchez of Colombia wants in this case, is going to
conclude anything, nor is it going to let it sit down, this is so, period, no.
If the monarchy contradicts the will of the federalist bloc, then the monarchy will
have to go to fight and set up a trench to fight. I'm not talking metaphorically,
I'm not talking about ...
It is clear, Iván. I think we are going to leave here the issue of the monarchy and
what it can do, because almost that gives us for another program, that if you want,
one day we will do one specifically on the role of the monarchy and the future that
the monarchy has in Spain.
We have already spent an hour and a half and we are going to abbreviate the final
part that I wanted you to deal with. Well, I think right now that the fish is
already sold, even if it is a rotten fish and full of anisakis.
Although from time to time a journalist says that something is going to happen at
the last minute and that the investigation is not going to be done, I believe that
there will be an amnesty law and there will be an investigation of Pedro Sánchez.
And then the question that I wanted to ask you is what answer can be given to this
amnesty process. On the one hand, the institutional response, I am seeing, well,
there were those who thought that the king would do something, even the army.
I need others, well, then maybe the Constitutional Court. Today we have seen that
eight vocals of the General Council of the Judicial Power, which are those
appointed to the proposal of the PP, have said that an extraordinary plenary
session must be held to go against the amnesty, but it should be remembered that
these eight vocals are a minority.
I believe there are another 12 that are, let's say, on the other side, because also
in the Judicial Power these two sides are reproduced, of which you have already
spoken, these two political sides, because the political parties have effectively
colonized everything in Spain.
So, on the one hand, if you see that there is some possibility of institutional
response and, secondly, if there is some possibility of response from the nation,
from the people, to speak plainly. I have received something that Libertad Digital
publishes today, I do not know what route that has, of a model of demand that they
ask that everyone present in courts and such against this amnesty law.
I have just arrived, I have not even been able to look at it, I think it has little
route, but hey, listen to what you think can be done institutionally, the
opposition, the judges, I don't know, and what we, the countrymen, can do.
Who wants to start, Héctor, if you want, I think it is the one who has not spoken
for the longest time, and with this we are finishing because we are going to leave
in a little while, so go ahead Héctor, we are listening to you.
Yes, to be very clear, institutional reaction from the institutions of the 78th
regime? None. But absolutely none, there is no possibility at all.
From the outside? Neither. Sánchez is totally committed to what they tell him from
the outside, what he has to do, always following the dictates of the European Union
and the 2030 Agenda, so from the outside it is not possible to expect anything at
all.
The only thing left is the nation. The nation realizes that the political regime in
which we live is not a democracy, and therefore the process of delegitimization
begins.
You have to start by saying, look, you, Mr. President of the Government, we obey
you because you control the tax agency and because you control the police, and with
both instruments you can put a physical or economic blow to each of us.
And that is the only reason why we obey you.
The moment this idea begins to establish itself within society is when the system
can come down like a castle in the air.
The first thing to do is not to vote, that it is not a legitimate power, that is
not what people have voted.
This government that is going to come out of this investigation is not what people
have voted either, because people cannot decide anything with the vote, but it has
to be done explicitly, and the way to do it explicitly is not to go to vote,
neither for some nor for others.
Because at the moment when each of us, dominated by our ideology, continues to say,
I'm going to vote because if not, I win, I'm going to vote for Pedro Sánchez
because if not, he's going to govern the right.
At the moment when each of the Spaniards enters that game, that Spaniard has ceased
to be free and is exercising political actions that go against his personal
interests as an individual, against his collective interests as a nation,
and is carrying out political actions that go in favor of the interests of the
political oligarchy, that go against the interests of their own. And this is what
people have to understand.
That every time we deposit a vote in the ballot box under the 1978 regime, we are
placing one more nail in the coffin of the Spanish nation.
There is no difference in practical terms in any of the political parties of the
1978 regime. They are all the same, they are all sons of whoever pays them, and
whoever pays them is the state.
There is no political freedom, there is no real difference between the political
parties, the different ideologies that each political party squanders, it is
nothing more than a trap and an instrument to gain a part of Spanish society and
continue to legitimize the regime of the oligarchy of parties.
What we have to do is realize the political game and start by not voting, and be
aware that we obey the regime, regardless of the government, of the color of the
party that is in that moment, only not because it is supported by the law, the
constitution to which we do not grant legitimacy,
but only covered by force. The moment you have no strength, we will not obey you,
we obey you only because you have the stake and the car of embargo in your hand,
and only for that, because we do not recognize your legitimacy.
And that is where we must begin to conquer the cultural hegemony of collective
political freedom. The moment we continue to vote, it is impossible for any
Spaniard to be politically free.
Freedoms will not be conquered, we will continue to have only the freedoms that the
political oligarchy wants us to have, as far as it wants us to have them, and when
it wants us to have them, and when it pleases it, it will withdraw them, as we saw
during the pandemic.
They withdrew them and there is no politician in jail. We have seen when judges
have prevaricated by declaring constitutional things that they are not, I am no
longer talking about amnesty, I am talking about gender equality between Spaniards,
and well, in a democratic system, those judges surely would not have acted that
way.
And if they had acted that way, they would have been prosecuted for prevarication
by their own colleagues, from a court formed by their own colleagues. But if there
is no politician in jail, and there is no prevaricating judge in jail, it is
because the system is an oligarchy that feeds back.
And this is what citizens have to understand, and not continue to grant legitimacy
to the political regime with their vote. Be very careful, the kingdom presents
itself to a selection.
I doubt that there will be an institutional response that will have material
effects. Of course, there will be a response from, for example, Vox or PP, which
will make their comedy of a good 70-year-old actor.
But they will not have, in any case, nor the PP comedy, nor the action of Vox, none
of the Vox will have tangible material consequences in terms of the process of the
amnesty law.
Once processed, the king will affirm, in the same way that he previously signed the
indictments, signed the derogation of the crime of sedition, he will sign the
amnesty law, and this will be the prelude to signing the call for self-
determination referendums,
with another name, with the format they want to give it, to disguise it from what
suits them in the political moment in which they take it out of the gutter, and
they will do it.
Because, as Héctor has said very brilliantly before, a couple of interventions ago,
King Felipe has not been able to sustain his speech on October 3, 2017 with his
actions. He has not done it.
And if he has not done it so far, it is predictable, it is not unreasonable to
venture that he will continue in the same tone, he will continue without sustaining
that speech with his actions. That was left behind.
The political capital that he accumulated with that speech was totally dilapidated,
there is no trace of that speech, more than the memory that the media can make
every October 3 to stain pages and occupy spaces with which to raise the crown and
adulterate his headline.
You have commented, Cristóbal, something that has caught my attention, this
initiative of a media that presents to its audience a model to impugn this eventual
amnesty law, that has neither feet nor head, how is it going to impugn something
that does not exist?
Yes, yes, a model for when the amnesty law is approved, to present it to the courts
and such. Well, it has just come to me, I have not had time to see very well what
they mean, I think it is something that a lawyer has prepared.
It is the first news that I have about it, but the first diagnosis that I make of
that soon is that this is entertainment for the masses, entertaining the masses so
that they do not have a tangible, material reaction that puts a stop to this crazy
drift, to this spiral of self-destruction.
And I would like, following what Héctor has commented on in his last speech, to
point out what is, from my point of view, well, from my point of view, no, I think
that is the reality, what is the deep reason why Pedro Sánchez has defended a
possible upcoming amnesty law and why an amnesty law is going to be approved for
the rebels of the Generalitat.
What is the deep reason for this amnesty? Why is it going to happen? Well, this
amnesty is going to happen because the 1978 regime prevents governors from directly
electing their government.
Pedro Sánchez needs to buy the votes of the elected deputies who do elect the
government, because the voters do not elect, the deputies do elect.
The only electors in Spain are the 350 ladies and gentlemen who sit in the congress
of the deputies, in the same way that the Holy Germanic Empire only had half a
dozen electors to elect the emperor.
Well, this is the deep reason for the amnesty, that citizens cannot elect their
government, that there are others who elect their government and that whoever wants
to be invested in the power of the government has to buy the voters and buys them
through this amnesty law.
And this is the most relevant thing I wanted to say about this question of the deep
reason for the amnesty.
And I wanted to point out, to finish, a question about the institutional reaction
that Cristóbal pointed out, that of these votes of the General Council of the
Judicial Power that have had this initiative of ...
They have urgently asked for a plenary session to debate the amnesty and someone,
it seems to be a vocal or several vocals, I don't know, have made statements to the
media claiming that a possible amnesty would mean the abolition of the rule of law
in Spain.
I believe that the vocals of the Judicial Power and the magistrates of the Judicial
Power in general should cover a little after what we have seen during the
coronavirus epidemic.
After we have seen that the Spanish Judicial Power was not at the demanding level
of the very high and noble responsibilities of which they are invested and allowed
the other powers of the state and other magistrates, their companions of the
Judicial Power, to violate the freedoms and rights of all citizens.
And they have done it and they have looked the other way, they have not taken a
single action, they have not promoted a single diligence to investigate if someone
within the three powers of the state has been able to commit a crime by violating
the Constitution as the Constitutional Court has sentenced, which they have done in
four different sentences.
So I do not expect anything at all from the Judicial Power. Absolutely nothing. I
would applaud enormously if suddenly these eight vocals of the Judicial Power, of
the General Council of the Judicial Power, stood up, denounced that amnesty is an
act of political barbarity, that this is barbarity, that this is promoting
rebellion against the nation,
that this is the transfer of the coup d'état of Barcelona to the Moncloa Palace,
but that they did it in a tangible way, not with words on paper or with statements
to the media.
No, with a tangible and factual political act, that they get up and leave the
General Council of the Judicial Power, that they limit in a block, that they say,
here is the regime of 78, we refuse to cooperate in this farce, because this is a
farce designed to satisfy the private and personal ambitions of Mr. Pedro Sánchez.
We are not going to see it, Javier, after dreaming that ...
No, I'm afraid not. I'm afraid not.
I'm afraid not. Thank you very much, Javier. We have to listen to Iván about those
possible institutional responses and popular responses, if there is any way in
which the Spaniards can defend ourselves from this attack. Go ahead, Iván, we
listen to you.
Well, at first I wanted to nuance a part of Javier's speech. In principle, I
absolutely agree that the root cause of what is happening is that the governors do
not elect the government, there is no election.
Pedro Sánchez is the one who has to buy will, obviously, in other parties so that
they see him. But he has said one thing, Javier, that in my opinion is not such. He
has said that those who elect are the 350 deputies. I don't think the 350 deputies
elect, but those who elect are the party leaders.
Those deputies are elected by the party leaders and those deputies what they do is
obey the will of the party leader. So those deputies do not press unanimously what
their party leader says. I mean, it's even worse. I wish it were what you said. I
hope not. It's worse still.
And with this I also want to say that the monarchy we have is not a parliamentary
monarchy, because the deputies do not have their own autonomy, there is no
parliament, it is a monarchy of parties. Because the power is in the party, in the
head of the parties. The deputies are simply the quota of power that each party
contains.
So, if there is an institutional solution, outside of institutions ... In the short
term, outside of institutions, I do not see any type of solution. What I see are
partial answers, as we have had in demonstrations.
I see that calling those demonstrations outside of the institutions, well, you have
to take it a little by force, because after all, there have been the parties
presiding in some way. But it is true that there is a civil force that overflows
even many times to those parties themselves.
I already know that most of those demonstrators are going to vote for VOX or PP.
But those answers that are made on the street, in civil society, that muscle that
is taken out, and answers that can also be seen as indignation to political events,
which will be partial, the parties will take them to print them in their policy.
I do not want to say that the solution is institutional, but there is a dialectic
between civil society and parties that is not a democratic dialectic, it is a
dialectic of legitimacy, of identification.
So, for example, on October 8, without October 8, VOX would not be what it is
today. Without May 15, Podemos would not exist. So the regime has the need, through
the parties, to neutralize the masses that are discontent with what is happening in
the 78 regime.
And the parties, then, have the need, the party that is in charge of neutralizing
that mass, has the need to identify with it and to produce, as far as possible,
without breaking the nature of the party, to reproduce it in politics, even if it
is only at the discursive level.
So, what I mean by this is that, institutionally, what can happen is a wear and
tear, a wear and tear for the struggle and for the fight between one and the other.
I have been pointing out for years that there is no consensus in Spain, although
right now I do see a constitutive power in one of the blocs, which is this
administrative and administrative bloc at the same time, because the administrators
of the administrators are together.
But I think that things can happen, that there can be opposition and that one bloc
wears out another, but civilly, not today. What has to happen for people to move?
What has to happen is a delegitimization of the state, not even of the 78 regime,
of the state.
That is, that the state is not able to solve people's lives, while people have and
feel more or less guaranteed their pension and know that they are going to stop
working and they are going to collect a pension and until death they are going to
live safely.
As long as people know that they are going to go to the doctor and although the
public health service has worsened, but as long as people know that there is a
public health service for them,
as long as people see that the state today solves people's lives, as long as people
continue to receive the possibility of working through the state, because the state
is capable of creating public employment directly by creating public debt out of
nowhere,
as long as people see that the state continues to give them things, people are not
going to move or they are not going to be enough. But when it collapses, which I
believe that one day it will have to collapse because nothing is eternal and I also
believe that this cannot last forever, when the welfare state collapses,
I believe that there will be a possibility that people will mobilize. And it is
very important that these political ideas begin to circulate, because the next
thing that has to be constituted has to be a constitutional republic, formal
democracy, in which there is separation of powers, political representation,
and that with that the national unity will be ensured and the majoritarian interest
will be ensured in the institutions, but that interest will not always be able to
exceed the constitutional and material limits of the Spanish nation or the national
state, nor of the rights that are considered constitutional.
Social rights and individual rights. Therefore, that institutional guarantee that
does not exist today is the one that must be implemented and when people find out,
that idea reaches people and there is also a breeding ground for people to
mobilize, which does not exist today, but there is the institutional capacity to
wear down the institutions
that the struggle for power, that one says A and the other says B, all that wears
down, because it also causes a political crisis that if a economic crisis and a
state insolvency survive, I believe that there will be a perfect climate for a
change.
But hey, don't think that's going to be wonderful, because I'm here presenting a
quite critical moment even for people's lives, I think it has to be something quite
tragic what has to happen, but it is important because one day it will happen and
it is important to spread these ideas.
Well, thank you very much Iván, I always say it, we have to be prepared for the
moment when the opportunity arises and that is one of the tasks that we do on this
channel, to encourage that when the opportunity arises, we know how to act.
I think we know what to do, we also know how to do it and we just need to have the
critical mass to be able to carry it out and that will come at any time, maybe much
earlier than we think.
I want to thank the three of you, Iván, Héctor and Javier, as always, I know we
have a lot of things left, I had more things written down here, you have also
opened up a lot of topics in your interventions, but don't worry, we've been here
for two hours and we'll do more programs because this is not going to end here.
And don't worry about us repeating ourselves, because these are ideas that we have
to go around, we have to go around them, refining them, deepening them, discovering
new tricks with which the regime distracts us, deceives us, tortures us.
And I think the three of you do that very well and other guests who come here, so
we will continue to crush these ideas and surely thank you once again to the three
of you and thank all of you who have been there live.
Help us spread it, some said move the Telegram channel more, so help us move it,
comment there, spread it among your acquaintances, put it on social networks and
enjoy what is left of the day of all the saints and thank you very much and very
soon we will be with you again. Until next time.