If the “Indignados” movements succeed, they would have quite a task renewing the old ways of the traditional political system from a new more radically minded democratic standpoint. If they don’t, they will have to adapt to this very same existing system. They will have to get institutionalized, that is, as the New Left once put it, “make its long march through the institutions.” Such is namely the case with Podemos as far as it claims to be a political delegate and executor of the Indignados mandate.
Podemos sees itself as a political party, although a new model one: on the one hand a party along classical lines, and on the other a kind of front organization, encompassing other spontaneous organizations which have sprouted out in different parts of the country. Some of them show a spirit of grassroots politics, whereas others have more specific goals. And all together make out the confluences with which Podemos makes its stand at the ballots. The Spanish electoral law allows for coalitions to be formed, so-called “instrumental parties” (partidos instrumentales), in order to catch more votes. Podemos articulates therefore a variety of autonomous movements. Here dawns a “new politics” idea geared to put an end to the two-party system and question the traditional party politics.
The outcome of the local councils and autonomic elections of 2015 seems to validate such a conclusion as the so-called “emergent forces” made a breakthrough in the institutions. According to the “New Politics” blueprint, these institutions are managed today by conglomerates of organizations which challenge the old patterns of party coalitions. The cases of Madrid and Barcelona are often cited, along with other examples of smaller town councils, like Valencia, Cádiz, or A Coruña. To repeat: we deal here mainly with municipal politics. In the autonomic elections all parties put forward their own name, although in certain cases, the confluences, they also make a bid in the electoral contests.
On considering with greater detail these confluences, we cannot overlook the fact that they have a variable relationship with the national question. In contemporary Spanish politics there is the usual left/right cleavage along with the national/plurinational one. Accordingly the theory of the confluences seen as clusters of spontaneous social movements doesn’t explain satisfactorily the facts, unless the national question be taken into account.
In the most significant municipalities, the game is played by the old-style political parties along with the emergent one, Podemos. If any alternative social movement takes a stand in local government it will surely show different degrees of nationalist or pro-independence leanings. The national question (with different nuances in each of the “historical nationalities”) can hardly be considered a typical element of any “New Politics” and will therefore need some kind of explanation.
The issue might be illustrated considering two representative municipalities: Barcelona and Madrid. Barcelona is run by a coalition government led by Barcelona en Comú. Other members of the alliance are ERC and PSC (traditional parties) and, at least externally, the CUP, a grassroots movement. At the Barcelona Confluence, Podemos has a rather modest, unassuming role. Besides, the nationalist discourse of the whole formation is a confusing, if not contradictory one. While ERC and the CUP are openly independentist, the PSC is not, and in Barcelona en Comú many trends coexist, although what seems to predominate we might call the “referendum” line, which is not necessarily pro-independence. Defending people’s right to decide, they argue, doesn’t turn you automatically into an independence supporter.
Madrid City Council political structure is different and easier to understand because it has no independentist tendencies. The political confrontation is the right/left cleavage. The government is a coalition of Madrid Ahora (the Confluence) and the PSOE. In the opposition, PP and Citizens.
Madrid Ahora, a development of a previous Ganemos Madrid, is inspired by and in close touch with Guanyem Barcelona. Ganemos Madrid comes in association with Podemos, IU, and Equo. The majority of councilors belong to Podemos, but the post of Mayor is held by Manuela Carmena, of Ganemos Madrid.
Although the electoral system is not presidential, the personal nature of the office of Mayor gives this a special relevance. On top of that, both mayoresses, Colau and Carmena, have a strong leadership style which sometimes collides strikingly with the spirit of the Indignados movement.
All factors considered – personal leadership, different “weight” of seats in representative bodies, impact and nature of the national question – municipal politics have a more fragmentary nature than the regional (“autonomic”) and national ones. Other smaller municipalities, like Valencia, Cadiz, A Coruña, seem to confirm this conclusion. Such fragmentation reaches a maximum in the local councils where the left/right cleavage overlaps the national/plurinational one.
In the case of Madrid, the sorpasso of the PSOE by Podemos in confluence with the old Communists is a fact. Whether or not this confluence gives way to a hegemonic party of the Left in Madrid remains to be seen. At any rate, the task of rebuilding the PSOE to get it back to the moments of glory at the beginning of the Transition looks like a Sisyphus curse.
In the case of Barcelona, the perspectives are different. The national/multinational axis prevails and reflects the polarization – democratic and civilized, but polarization nonetheless – in the whole of Catalan society. For the time being, the Indignados are represented in the Catalan Parliament by the group Catalunya Sí que es Pot which includes Podemos but not Barcelona en Comú. Things would surely look different if Barcelona en Comú would stand up for the next regional election, in which case there will likely be a merge between the two groups, probably under leadership from Ada Colau of Barcelona en Comú. Whether or not Colau poses her candidacy as president of Catalonia, everything points to the birth of a third option in the independence/no independence axis. Prima facie it looks like a good idea. The problem is its feasibility in a highly polarized society.
The impact of the Indignados on municipal politics has deepened their fragmentary nature. But it would be a mistake to conclude from this that the promise of a “new politics” – to include into a single denomination all proposals of Indignados – will lead to a future without problems. It is not clear that its grasp at the micro-level of government will go on to do the same at the meso- and macro-levels.
In fact, municipal politics has always been fragmentary. Their own nature, the close relationships between citizens and administrators, the narrow scope of policy decisions, and the sheer demographic dimensions – all of these offer the possibility of articulating independent, even personalist options. Besides, the relatively low costs of erecting local alternatives make them the more probable. The reservoir of independent options serves as a breeding ground for the emergence of the confluences. Success at the local level drives the platforms in the wake of the Indignados toward higher institutional orders, the regional or national domains. And it is there where the action of the confluences begins to present difficulties because it is not easy to handle representative institutions with radical participatory, horizontal, assembly-like criteria.
By the time the Indignados via Podemos and the confluences push toward the supreme representative and legislative organ of the state, this challenge becomes more acute. Equally risky would be to get into reverse and turn the promise of the “New Politics” into a remake of the “old politics.” In its way toward the general ballot of 26 June 2016, Podemos entered into an electoral coalition with Izquierda Unida (United Left), an umbrella name for the old Spanish Communist Party. Together they hammered out a new name for the construct, namely Unidos Podemos (United We Can), with a somewhat disappointing result of losing more than 1 million votes in comparison with the previous election. It is difficult to see what the old Spanish Communist Party has to do with any “New Politics” approach of the Indignados movement and the confluences. Surely, the Communists sided, individually and as a party, with the Indignados from the very beginning, but always as outsiders, as a kind of external support, with very few points in common.
We need to remember Karl Marx’s counsel in The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. We ought not to let the traditions of dead generations weigh like a nightmare on the brains of the living Indignados.
PICTURE 8
President Obama talks with Spanish political opposition leader Pablo Iglesias Turrión, Secretary General of Podemos, at Torrejón Air Base in Madrid, 10 July 2016. Courtesy: The White House (Pete Souza)