Plan to Refound Spain: Federation, Referendum, End Monarchy

Plan to Refound Spain: Federation, Referendum, End Monarchy

A proposal to dismantle the 1978 regime and launch a constituent process circulates through economic forums with an ambitious promise: satisfying 100% of Spaniards, regardless of ideology or origin. The package includes eleven points ranging from abolishing the monarchy to imposing the death penalty for terrorism, antiestéticaturing an accession referendum in each autonomous community. The author admits spending 24 sleepless hours reflecting on images of police charges against youths, the elderly, and mothers.

The initial reaction was far from unanimous. The first critic warned that Basques, Navarrese, and Catalans would not accept it. The response trinc ultimatum-like logic: if they do not want to join, they vote no and become independent. Goodbye then.

What the Constituent Process Actually Proposes

The refounding decalogue begins by removing what it calls Old Regime privileges: no more monarchy or medieval charters (fueros), with every Spaniard exactly equal. Only one nation: Spain. Each autonomous community votes in a referendum on joining the resulting federation; those voting no are left to fend for themselves. The King is dismissed due to job elimination, receiving compensation based on salary scales.

Point eight touches a systemic nerve: politicians must not appoint judges; judges should be elected among themselves. Point nine introduces a bonus of 30 MPs for election winners, while point ten reinstates the death penalty for terrorism and heinous crimes. Point eleven concludes with equal rights and duties.

Reception was mixed. A recurring analysis argues this merely fragments Spain and opens the door to repeatable Balkanization. Another view holds that the autonomous community is the most abject offspring of the very regime being dissolved, making its acceptance as a decision unit a fundamental contradiction.

The Problem of Federating What Is Already United

The most repeated objection is logical, not ideological. If the political subject in Spain is already the nation, federalism is inherently unifying, and one cannot unify what is already united. To federalize, one must first separate. Thus, some conclude that federalism makes no sense in Spain and that pogre defending it appear ridiculous.

Others go further, denying the premise entirely: Spain is a state, never a nation. Debate shifted to the optimal territorial model. One school argues Spain functioned best with strong local power and central administration for defense, foreign affairs, justice, education, and major projects, leaving health and services to municipalities. Another recalls that all countries formed by integrating smaller units and notes Europe is advancing in that direction.

The "coffee for everyone" concept also has its interpretation: some claim real distribution is black coffee only for three regions—Catalonia, the Basque Country, and Madrid.

Money, Financing, and the Break That Never Comes

The economic axis appears early. It is argued that commercial dependence between Catalonia and the rest of Spain is high, so secession would damage the market. The rebuttal claims Spain is a captive market for expensive, poor-quality Catalan products due to political reasons, and without such constraints, consumers could buy better, cheaper goods from Germany, the Netherlands, or Italy. The counter-rebuttal: identity is not for sale; elites seek to avoid accountability.

Regarding a break, the diagnosis is pessimistic. A rapid rupture requires violent street conflict, which does not exist. Most protesters are motivated not by Spanish unity but by having to forgive billions. With full stomachs, right-wing support is superficial. Calculating who pays what, broken down by territory, could fill a treaty.

Fiscal pressure emerges as an alternative: to end such a regime, cut its financing, avoid taxes, and capture as much EU funding as possible until the system collapses.

Reforms, Penalties, and Other Ways Out of the Maze

Opposed to the constituent process, another current proposes concrete reforms: electoral system, pensions, public administration. A presidential runoff avoids dependence on nationalist partners; genuine district MPs replace hand-picked lists; judge-elected governments exclude political intervention.

The death penalty triggers immediate rejection. Critics warn the definition of terrorism has stretched to include smashing car windows, making such measures dangerous. Others note the previous regime did not self-dissolve; there was institutional continuity, two alternating parties, and a PSOE that reappeared when it previously did not exist.

Direct participation proposals close the circle. Parties should stop intermediating; citizens should directly vote on laws and state decisions. This is technically antiestéticasible but ignored because concentrating power benefits those holding it and lobbies needing only to bribe a few.

What if the problem isn't institutional design, but that no system withstands the population inhabiting it?