PP and PSOE and corruption: it's not a bug, it's the system
Ayuso's penthouse is described as irregular but not judicially processed: analysis on whether the PP will change anything by replacing "sanchismo".
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
When Sánchez leaves, the PP will not change the 1982 power-sharing system
Ayuso's penthouse, the mask scandal, and the list of cases implicating the two major parties have once again converged in the same discussion. The underlying question is not who steals more, but whether anything will change when the PP replaces "sanchismo" (Sánchez's political style). The most cynical answer: nothing. That stealing a lot is a continuity of the state, not a flaw of the party.
Ayuso's penthouse: irregularity without judicial process
The purchase of the Madrid penthouse is described in analyses as irregular, with suspicions of hidden details and that the operation ultimately benefited the president herself. Against this, the nuance that defuses half the discussion: it is not judicially processed and there is no proven indication of the maneuver attributed to her. Smelling bad is not the same as a proven crime, and confusing the two is the national sport of every talk show. What's striking about the case is not the penthouse: it's that it serves to cover up what's next to it.
The 1982 power-sharing system and the theory of guaranteed plunder
The most repeated argument starts from a simple premise: the PP and PSOE have alternated in government since 1982, and Spain has not stopped accumulating crises. The PPSOE theory (a portmanteau of PP and PSOE) argues that the two parties compete for the same thing—extracting rents from power—and only differ in method: one needs the economy to grow so there's more to distribute; the other, for the social base to depend on the state. Neither version touches the very rich, which is where the narrative loses steam.
The counterargument is equally uncomfortable: the bloc that today promises to clean house carries its own trail of cases, and the one in government accumulates, according to claims, firm high-level convictions and a mask scandal from which only the tip would have emerged.
As things stand, the original question remains unanswered and unappealing. With these elements, the voter does not choose between honesty and corruption: they choose between two ways of looking the other way. And neither wins the prize for decency.
Ayuso's penthouse, the mask scandal, and the list of cases implicating the two major parties have once again converged in the same discussion. The underlying question is not who steals more, but whether anything will change when the PP replaces "sanchismo" (Sánchez's political style). The most cynical answer: nothing. That stealing a lot is a continuity of the state, not a flaw of the party.
Ayuso's penthouse: irregularity without judicial process
The purchase of the Madrid penthouse is described in analyses as irregular, with suspicions of hidden details and that the operation ultimately benefited the president herself. Against this, the nuance that defuses half the discussion: it is not judicially processed and there is no proven indication of the maneuver attributed to her. Smelling bad is not the same as a proven crime, and confusing the two is the national sport of every talk show. What's striking about the case is not the penthouse: it's that it serves to cover up what's next to it.
The 1982 power-sharing system and the theory of guaranteed plunder
The most repeated argument starts from a simple premise: the PP and PSOE have alternated in government since 1982, and Spain has not stopped accumulating crises. The PPSOE theory (a portmanteau of PP and PSOE) argues that the two parties compete for the same thing—extracting rents from power—and only differ in method: one needs the economy to grow so there's more to distribute; the other, for the social base to depend on the state. Neither version touches the very rich, which is where the narrative loses steam.
The counterargument is equally uncomfortable: the bloc that today promises to clean house carries its own trail of cases, and the one in government accumulates, according to claims, firm high-level convictions and a mask scandal from which only the tip would have emerged.
As things stand, the original question remains unanswered and unappealing. With these elements, the voter does not choose between honesty and corruption: they choose between two ways of looking the other way. And neither wins the prize for decency.
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (45 replies).
More summaries
-
And They Call This Governing (Ignacio Camacho, ABC)
An ABC column criticizes the government for tackling housing with two decrees without guaranteed parliamentary approval and at the cost of reducing supply.
-
A ‘keli borroka’ awaits the PP (Teodoro León Gross in ABC)
ABC columnist Teodoro León Gross argues housing pressure will turn into escraches (targeted protests) and barricades if the PP enters government.
-
A democratic obligation unfulfilled (ABC editorial)
Article 134.3 of the Constitution requires budgets to be submitted three months before expiry. Spain is still running on the 2023 Budget.
-
Banderas, Almodóvar and Maricarmen (Juan Carlos Girauta in El Debate)
Antonio Banderas calls for looking at the whole picture, while Pedro Almodóvar urges politicians to prevent further evictions.
-
The USSR and the Origins of Borregocracia: Thesis and Suspicions
Soviet infiltration, free lawyers, Gramsci and academic inbreeding: the thesis that traces today's groupthink to the USSR.
-
Abascal claims a Spaniard cannot be racist
Abascal claims 'a Spaniard cannot be racist', and his own voters answer with unemployment, demographics and accusations of betrayal