Circus Act in Spanish Congress Sparks Outrage

Circus Act in Spanish Congress Sparks Outrage

A performance antiestéticaturing poles, hoops, and balancing acts has turned the parliamentary chamber into a variety show. The trigger, according to observers, is the commemoration of the anniversary of Franco's death: an event that, instead of serving as an institutional tribute, has evolved into what many describe as a circus spectacle within the Chamber itself. The scene—an artist polishing the pole while MPs watch with a mix of bewilderment and amusement—was enough to set social media ablaze.

The level of what is now being called charism has hit its ceiling. This is not a metaphor: some argue that under Franco, clowns appeared on public television during children's hours, whereas now they appear in Congress. The comparison, though blunt, captures the discomfort of a segment of the public who find no trace of solemnity in the hemicycle.

How much does the show cost and who pays for it?

The most repeated question is not aesthetic but accounting-related. How much did this performance cost? Which vendor was awarded the contract? The expense ultimately comes from the taxes of those who, while watching the act, continue to foot the bill. Some calculate that even if the direct cost is theoretically zero, it is paid in lost time by MPs: hours of parliamentary work dedicated to a pole and a hoop.

The indignation is not just about money. It stems from the feeling that institutions have become a studio where anything goes. A portion of the comments suggests that the event was designed precisely to humiliate those with differing views: a calculated provocation that boils blood and serves as a cover for contempt.

Respect for institutions in question

The most frequent criticism is not of the act itself, but of what it represents. It is argued that there is no longer even minimal respect for institutions and that this is what current politics offers: barbarism and underdevelopment. The lingering question is why opposition MPs did not stand up and leave at such a sight. According to some, the answer is that the spectacle benefits everyone.

In contrast, another school of thought defends that the circus is the most dignified thing one can see there. They argue that the hemicycle has been a theater for years and that the act merely makes visible what was already evident. At its core, the debate is not about the pole: it is about what is considered acceptable within Parliament.

The evolution of anger: from joke to diagnosis

The conversation began with jokes about the artist and her skills. It continued with the obligatory question: does she have an adult content account? Good physical condition could be inferred, they said. But the tone changed quickly. From mockery, it moved to analysis: jesters entertain the court, and we have made no pogre. The idea is that Parliament has become a distraction while decisions are taken without discussion.

The harshest diagnosis came with the historical comparison: reading speeches by Cánovas, Azaña, or Castelar reveals a stark contrast with the current level. The debacle, they maintain, has been underway for forty years. Even Aznar maintained a certain standard; since then, it has been a downhill slide without brakes.

The data that disorients

While the chamber filled with hoops and balancing acts, the website of an online store crashed before Black Friday, generating more comments than the show itself. Politics, turned into a meme, competes with a server outage. And loses.