<![CDATA[Ara Balears in English - Joan Pau Jordà]]> 10 <![CDATA[Does the robe also vote?]]> If an alien landed in our country today and only read the newspaper headlines, they would probably think that Spain is governed from the courts, and perhaps they wouldn't be too wrong. While Pedro Sánchez's PSOE accumulates investigations affecting the Government's circle and the PP continues to be pursued by corruption cases, in our country a simple graffiti at an environmental protest has even been classified as terrorism. The feeling is that a large part of the political confrontation has moved from parliaments to the courts, to the point that judges seem to have become another actor in the public dispute. In this context, the question is inevitable: does justice really work?Before attempting to answer the question, it is worth remembering a fact. A democracy is not limited to holding elections every four years; it also needs independent institutions that mutually control each other. The Constitution proclaims this separation of powers and guarantees judicial independence. However, there is often a considerable distance between principle and practice. After all, courts do not exist outside of society, but are part of it and inevitably reflect its tensions and contradictions.Judges have a certain way of understanding the world, like anyone else. And the data show a reality that is difficult to deny: only one in ten judges considers themselves progressive. This does not automatically make judges biased. One can be conservative and apply the law with absolute professionalism. But it is also legitimate to wonder if a judiciary so ideologically homogeneous does not end up generating certain biases, even if they are unconscious. Because, I ask myself, is it healthy that those who judge such a plural society come almost always from the same social environment?Citizens, in any case, have already passed judgment. According to a survey by Ateneo del Dato, almost half of Spaniards consider that justice is not impartial. The CIS is even more forceful: almost nine out of ten citizens believe that a powerful person does not receive the same treatment as an ordinary citizen, and confidence in the courts barely reaches 4.76 out of 10. A justice that does not inspire confidence is an institutionally weaker justice.The responsibility for this situation is shared: political polarization has turned the courts into an extension of Parliament. Parties applaud rulings that benefit them and denounce those that harm them as if they were an attack on democracy. Leaks of case files fuel parallel trials and some particularly controversial instructions end up damaging the credibility of the entire system. And that's how we are.I believe that justice functions reasonably well in the vast majority of everyday conflicts – a divorce, a traffic accident, and a robbery, for example. It does so with an often despairing slowness, but, in general terms, it fulfills its corresponding function and is comparable to that of countries in our environment, such as France, Italy, and Portugal. However, we must not forget that it is a justice of a liberal democracy, with the virtues and limitations that this entails.His big problem, then, is another. The reason is that whoever has money buys time. He can hire the best lawyers, file appeals almost indefinitely, and withstand processes that last for years. Whoever doesn't have it, resigns themselves. Equality before the law is a legal principle; equality before the possibilities of defending oneself is another story.Nor can it be ignored that the Spanish justice system is an institution heir to the Transition and, therefore, to the transformation of the structures of the Francoist state into a democratic system. And, as in so many other areas, some inertia still persists, such as the elitism of the judiciary itself. Let us remember that accessing the judicial career requires years of preparation for competitive examinations without income, a luxury that many families cannot afford. Then, some are still surprised that judges often share the same social background, the same legal culture, and a certain way of understanding the world.Finally, a reflection addressed to Majorcanists: it is important not to forget an evidence that too often goes unnoticed. The magistracy is a power of the State and, like any other state institution, has the function of guaranteeing and preserving the current constitutional order. Therefore, expecting the courts to resolve linguistic and self-government conflicts that call into question this very constitutional framework is an unrealistic expectation. After all, it is difficult for any judicial power in the world to adopt decisions that contradict the legal and constitutional foundations on which its own authority is based.Perhaps the lesson is this: justice can resolve disputes, prosecute crimes, and protect rights, but it will never replace politics. Those who aspire to transform society would do well not to confuse courts with ballot boxes, nor judgments with solutions to major collective conflicts.

]]> <![CDATA[Mallorca: between ‘La Balanguera’ and the world]]>

There are ideas that are born in an office. Others, at a coffee break. And then there are ideas that appear when someone has been thinking about the same question for too long and decides that, instead of continuing to grumble alone, it is better to gather people and have them discuss it in public. The conference "Majorcan identity in the 21st century: continuities, fractures and narratives" undoubtedly belongs to this third category.The event, organized by Professor Ernest Carranza at Can Oleo, in Palma, brought together diverse but very complementary profiles. Thus, Miquel Sbert and Andreu Ramis reflected on the role of traditions in a society in constant transformation; Mercè Picornell offered a particularly suggestive view on new ways of participating in Mallorcan identity; and finally, Antoni Janer coordinated a round table.As often happens with good conversations, the conferences did not end because the arguments had been exhausted, but because the custodians reminded us that, no matter how much we discussed the future of Mallorca, the building closed at a certain hour. And perhaps this is the most important detail of all. Because, beyond the lectures, what was really worthwhile was the conversation.It had been a long time since I had enjoyed a public debate so much. There were few of us, yes, but perhaps that was part of the charm. It wasn't one of those talks where, before sitting down, you already know exactly what they're going to tell you and where everything ends up being a sum of parallel monologues. Something else happened here. That literary atmosphere, which is becoming increasingly difficult to find, was palpable: a space where you can disagree without needing to turn any difference into a trench.I also have to say that I also did my bit with a communication. It was titled Relatos en disputa: history, symbols, and identity in contemporary Mallorca. My intervention started from a very simple idea: identities do not arise spontaneously, but are a social construction. And, precisely for this reason, they are also an object of dispute. In Mallorca, this dispute is visible everywhere. In street names, public signage, at school, on commemorative days, or in the presence of institutional symbols. That "La Balanguera" plays in a supermarket. That a Mallorcan influencer moves naturally through social networks. That a popular festival is perceived as one's own by people of very different profiles. It is here, in these apparently insignificant gestures, where cultural hegemonies are built. This struggle is not divided into two perfectly defined sides. Between Spanish nationalism and Catalan nationalism, we could say. Identity debates, rather, move on a scale of greys. Because reality is much more complex than television often suggests. We all know that in Mallorca you can claim the Catalan language without questioning the current institutional framework; that you can feel Mallorcan and Spanish at the same time; or that you can defend greater self-government without being an independentist, to say something. Deep down, the debate is very simple: who has the capacity to define what Mallorca is?However, it is important not to lose perspective, because there is a fact that is difficult to refute: despite all the nuances, Spanish identity in Mallorca enjoys an enviable health. Its great triumph has been to achieve that, for a large majority of the population, feeling Mallorcan and feeling Spanish are not conflicting identities, but perfectly compatible ones. As historian Ferran Archilés has pointed out, the Spanish national project has not only not failed, but has demonstrated a remarkable capacity for integration, incorporating regional diversity within a narrative widely accepted as natural. And here the big question arises: where is Mallorcan identity heading? The answer is that no one knows for sure. But we do know one thing: identities are not immutable, but rather evolve as societies do. To think that the Mallorca of the future will be exactly the same as today's is as naive as believing that the current Mallorca is the same as that of fifty years ago. What I think could happen is that a 'light' Majorcan identity emerges. Apparently less ideologized, capable of integrating an increasingly diverse society without renouncing a part of the culture and traditions. In this new context, it must be assumed that this new society will inevitably include Majorcans of diverse origins who only speak Spanish. The question that remains to be resolved, in my opinion, is whether these new identities will be reduced to a purely folkloric expression or whether, on the contrary, they will transform into a collective project capable of engaging new generations. This, probably, will depend on what we Majorcanists are capable of doing. 

]]> <![CDATA[Elections are smelled]]> In the Balearic Islands, no elections have been called yet, but the characteristic smell of pre-campaign is already in the air: more headlines, more polls, more visits to markets and fairs, and more politicians promising that, now yes, they have understood what really worries people...

]]> <![CDATA[When hate stops surprising: the danger of normalizing the far-right]]>

A few months ago, almost without making a sound —and that should already make you suspicious— a neo-Nazi cell was dismantled in Spain. Three detainees, weapons, training, and attack plans inspired by real massacres. Furthermore, they weren't acting alone: they were connected to an international terrorist network. But well, it seems like a small thing, as the news went largely unnoticed. Perhaps because it doesn't fit with this comfortable narrative we keep telling ourselves. You know, the one that says violence always comes from outside, or that it's a thing of the past. Because, how many times have we heard that the dangers are jihadist terrorism or the environment of the defunct ETA, or –even better– that nothing is happening and we live in a kind of peaceful paradise?... A homemade version of Brave New World, by Huxley.The dismantled group in question has been defined as "accelerationist." The name seems complicated, but the idea is quite simple: to provoke chaos so that everything explodes and, once the system is broken, impose their own. And their model is not exactly inclusive: it is a racist, neoliberal, and authoritarian world. All very sophisticated on paper… and very dangerous in practice.And no, we are not talking about four people making comments on the internet or discussing in the bar. We are talking about connected people, with very clear ideas and with the will to make them a reality. People who see in social unrest and the rise of certain political discourses an opportunity. And this is no longer a joke.Violence is never justified. But to understand these small groups, perhaps we need to look at the context. Crises have been accumulating for years: economic, social, climatic. And in this framework, working classes have it increasingly difficult, and many people simply cannot make ends meet. Meanwhile, politics often seems more focused on managing the present than on building any future. And on a global scale, the panorama doesn't help either: an increasingly violent world, with powers like the United States, Russia, and Israel playing at showing strength in conflicts that many of us wouldn't even know how to place on the map.In this scenario, the result is predictable: frustration, uncertainty, and little hope. And when this happens, simple discourses gain ground. Those that offer easy explanations and even easier culprits. And, curiously, they almost always point to the same people: the most vulnerable. It is much more comfortable to say that "the problem is outsiders" than to analyze what is really wrong. Besides, acting brave by saying "uncomfortable truths" is successful. And so, little by little, a climate that fuels hatred is normalized.This process is subtle. Thus, what previously seemed exaggerated is now discussed. And what is discussed today may end up being normal tomorrow. Without major scandals, without obvious ruptures. Everything shifts a little. And it doesn't move on its own: there are those who push it, from certain media to certain powers that be. Faced with this, the question is inevitable: who benefits from all this?Because, generated according to certain breeding grounds, it is not surprising that some take a further step. They are not the majority, but they are not isolated cases either. Let's be clear that it is increasingly common for these discourses to end in real aggressions. The data confirm this, racist and xenophobic violence is increasing. And there are figures that are particularly striking: according to the Ministry of the Interior, approximately half of homosexual people have suffered some aggression in the last year. Half. It is not an exaggeration, it is a reality.In fact, alarms have been sounding for some time. In the United States, the FBI itself has already warned that far-right violent groups are one of the main internal threats. In Europe, the numbers may seem calmer. Europol's TE-SAT report says that in 2023 there were 120 terrorist actions, mostly of a separatist nature. Far-right ones? Only two, and they were thwarted. Case closed, right? Well, not exactly. Because the same report explains –perhaps with fewer headlines– that the problem is not so much the quantity as the type. It talks about lone wolves, small groups, young people who not only consume propaganda but create it and, sometimes, act. It is a more diffuse model, more difficult to detect and prevent. Less classical structure, more improvised radicalization. And what is more serious: it is a violence that is increasing. But yes, relax, there were only two.Faced with all this, the conclusion is clear: democracy is not guaranteed. It is not a permanent state, but a fragile balance. If we stop questioning certain discourses or attitudes, we end up accepting them without realizing it. And when this happens, the door can be opened to barbarism.All of this recalls that poem by Martin Niemöller which ends by saying: "When they came for me, there was no one left to protest." Perhaps we don't need to wait to see if it also affects us to start worrying. Let's think about it twice.

]]> <![CDATA[Catalan Countries: useful, or they will not be]]> “The clump of reeds has that strength that, if you tie the whole clump with a strong rope and want to uproot it all, I tell you that ten men, no matter how much they pull, will not uproot it even with many more; and if you remove the rope, from reed to reed, an eight-year-old boy will break it, so that no reed will remain there.” With this metaphor, Ramon Muntaner spoke to us, in the 14th century, about the ties between Catalans, Valencians, and Balearics, and the need to act together. Seven centuries later, I had the opportunity to participate in another Mata de Jonc. In Vila-real –Plana Baixa–, a series of conferences were organized, promoted by the Llull Federation (OCB, Òmnium, and ACPV) that sought to create meeting spaces among people from different Catalan-speaking territories. Over a weekend, people from diverse backgrounds shared debates, workshops, and conversations to dream of possible futures, which often continued in the hallways or at the table. We did not always agree – and it is better so –, but one thing was clear: the need to listen to each other more across territories. These types of encounters serve precisely for that: to exchange points of view without preconceptions and without prefabricated discourses. Without grand stagings or solemn proclamations. Just people talking, discussing, and, from time to time, changing their minds. Because, what do we really know about the problems of the Valencians and principatins?

]]> <![CDATA[Between the desert and memory: half a century of Sahrawi resistance]]> These days we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the proclamation of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR). The tricolor crescent flag was raised for the first time on February 27, 1976, in Bir Lehlu, a small village in the middle of the desert. That moment was much more than a simple political declaration; it represented a people's struggle to exist.

]]> <![CDATA[Mallorca, capital: Barcelona]]> The year was 1936. A few months before the outbreak of the Civil War, a multitude of intellectuals signed the Response to the CatalansIt was not a symbolic or circumstantial gesture. It was a serious, well-considered, and courageous manifesto that stated something very simple: Mallorcans share a language, share a culture, and want to walk together. In other words, it was a declaration of the Catalan identity of the Balearic Islands. It was drafted by Miquel Ferrà i Juan and signed by 151 leading figures of island culture. The coup d'état and the Francoist dictatorship cut it all off at the root, as Spain tends to do when something makes it uncomfortable.

]]> <![CDATA[Impunity as a state policy]]> Democratic memory in Spain is like a game: selectively remembering what suits us and conveniently forgetting the rest. For years, we've heard that the Transition was a period of harmony, peace, and collective embraces, in which King Juan Carlos brought us freedoms. A kind of fairy tale where we all suddenly decided to forget our differences and walk together toward democracy, as if nothing had happened.

]]> <![CDATA[The African century begins in the Sahel]]> The world's population reached 8 billion in 2022, and although India recently surpassed China as the most populous country, it is Africa that is capturing the attention of experts due to its rapid population growth. Over the last century, this continent has gone from two hundred million inhabitants to becoming one of the most populous and youngest regions in the world, with 1.4 billion. The majority of its people are under thirty, a stark contrast to the widespread aging in many other regions. Demographers, in fact, estimate that in just a few years, this continent will represent a quarter of the world's population. This dynamism could generate a significant demographic dividend and favor the rise of new powers such as Tanzania and Nigeria. For this reason, many authors assert that the 21st century will be the "century of Africa." However, it is not all rosy, because this hopeful future coexists with an old shadow: the persistent influence of the former colonial powers.

]]> <![CDATA[Why MORE must learn to grow up without ceasing to be useful]]> My party, MÁS per Mallorca, has called its congress for next month. And I couldn't resist getting involved—what can we do, that's just how we are. Because for an outside observer—or even for a moderately astute activist—the situation within the eco-sovereignist movement is starting to resemble that moment when you walk into a room and can't remember what you came there to do. You want to do something (useful?), yes, but political Alzheimer's has suddenly struck, and you end up shuffling through old papers and pretending to be very busy. And that's where we are: very busy, but without knowing exactly what we're doing.

]]> <![CDATA[Do we need unions in this country?]]>

Trade unionism needs a profound overhaul. And the country's trade unionism—the pro-sovereignty one; the pro-Catalan one; the one from here, if you understand what I mean—even more so. I haven't said anything you don't already know. Who joins a union today? You don't have to be a genius to realize that labor associations are trapped in dynamics that don't always respond to workers' problems. We have many symptoms of this situation. The fact that last May Day there was no demonstration or significant event by pro-sovereignty unions is a clear example of this. On the day the world of labor celebrates its annual liturgy, "our" people weren't there. And the most serious thing is that no one noticed, no one was surprised, no one was scandalized. Indifference has taken hold on the pro-sovereignty left, and this is very dangerous.

]]> <![CDATA[The left loves Vox]]> Now that the new political year is beginning, I'd like to say something undeniable: it seems the left likes the PP and Vox to govern. As the poet and activist García Montero put it: the left-wing parties are "very interested" in the existence of Vox, a party they believe needs to be "protected." Because the more noise the fascists make, the more mobilized the left is. Yes, yes, you didn't misread me. When the right is in power, the progressives seem to light up like St. John's rockets: assemblies, demonstrations, banners, statements... A real festival of social energy.

]]> <![CDATA[Do we save the language or pretend we are trying?]]>

A few days ago I received an interview published in the newspaper Berria starring Irish sociolinguist Conchúr Ó Giollagáin. The name may sound unfamiliar, but the man is no amateur: born in Dublin in 1966, he's a professor of Gaelic research at the University of the Scottish Highlands and Islands, a veteran of minority language studies. In short, he knows what he's talking about.

]]> <![CDATA[The Mallorca of the future will be Spanish-speaking]]>

There are times when, in order to grow, it's necessary to kill the father, that's how it is. Not out of hatred or contempt, but out of liberation. Mallorcanism must do it, and quickly. Because whether we like it or not, it still functions with ideas inherited from the Transition. A time when it seemed everything was possible... and then it wasn't so much. We keep repeating rituals that give us a false sense of coherence—what demonstrations we organized! What speeches!—while the real country falls apart in our hands.

]]>