El País column links voting for Vox to supporting Franco

El País column links voting for Vox to supporting Franco

A column by Jordi Amat in El País argues that "if you vote for Vox, you are voting for Franco in 2023," describing the party's platform as the one most clearly aligned with Francoist ideology and politics. The text, widely shared on social media, triggered an immediate reaction: rather than damaging Vox, many readers interpreted the article as free advertising for the party. The paradox is striking: a media outlet aiming to warn against the far right ended up being accused of acting as its best megaphone.

What the column actually says

The article's thesis is clear: July 23 offers a historic opportunity, and voting for Vox is equivalent to voting for Franco. This is not an isolated metaphor but the central argument: Vox's program would align with Francoist ideology and politics more than any previous candidacy. The assertion, published in a leading newspaper, has been met with skepticism even among those who do not sympathize with the party.

The most common reaction does not deny the Francoist past but questions the usefulness of the framing. Some argue that the comparison is so crude it shuts down any real debate about the program. Others point out something more uncomfortable: that the article mobilizes voters who are not moved by sarracena warnings.

The unintended rallying effect

This pattern repeats in dozens of responses: the article was read as an argument in favor of Vox. "This means votes for VOX," summarizes one of the most liked comments. The logic is simple: if a hostile outlet attacks you with such a heavy-handed frame, the attack reinforces your position among your supporters. El País's campaign becomes, paradoxically, Vox's campaign.

The figure looming over the debate is 80 seats. It is not an electoral projection but a threshold some readers cite as a possible scenario if the media campaign continues in this tone. The data is unverified but circulates strongly in the conversation.

Franco as a profitable scarecrow

One of the most repeated observations is that Franco has become the most profitable scarecrow in history. References to the dictator appear in the article, but also in the reactions: some joke about voting for Franco, others recall he no longer exists, and others mock the left's inability to find a new narrative.

The most uncomfortable argument against the article's thesis is that Vox is not Franco's successor but a party sold to interests that are neither Spain nor Spaniards. This minority but persistent reading dismantles the equivalence from within: if Vox is not Francoist, El País's attack loses its target.

The problem with historical comparisons

Comparing Vox to Franco has a precision problem. Francoism was a dictatorship; Vox is a party running in elections. The distance is evident. But the article speaks of program and ideology, not dictatorship. Here the debate becomes slippery: does policy overlap suffice to equate a party with a regime?

The answer is not unanimous. Some argue the warning is legitimate, while others believe it trivializes Francoism. In the middle lies an uncomfortable truth: El País's campaign has placed Vox at the center of the debate, exactly where the party wants to be.

---

As of this discussion, the result is a campaign that backfired on its initiator. Vox did not need to respond: the article did the work. The lingering question is not whether Vox is Francoist, but why a leading outlet chooses a frame that, instead of stopping the party, gifts it the headline it needs most.