Unidos Podemos: Errejon, Bustinduy, Iglesias, Montero, Garzon, Mayoral, Bescansa after the results of Spain's national elections in June, 2016.Jimenez Rodrigo\/Press Association. All rights reserved.Following decades of
\nsocial mobilization throughout the 1990s and 2000s premised on the idea of \u201cchanging
\nthe world without taking power\u201d, through building progressive alliances in
\nautonomous spaces, at a distance from the state, the emergence of 15-M in spring
\nof 2011 placed the unique character of the post-Franco \u201878 regime firmly on the
\ntable. <\/i><\/p>\n
This movement brought The emergence of This movement <\/em>phase of the party came to an abrupt With their eyes The effect of these decisions In our previous So we arrive at the second state-wide assembly of The main difference between the assembly two years ago and today is that Iglesias and Errej\u00f3n are leading two different sets of documents and candidates\u2019 lists: Podemos for All<\/em>,<\/em> supported by the former, and Recovering Illusion<\/em>, <\/em>promoted by the second. <\/p>\n This schism between A third important Our contributions to Tuesday\u2019s trio of Wednesday, we ask: Can the party be Thursday tackles: How to expand Are those likely to be attracted to the political centre, The final selection Joan Unidos Podemos: Errejon, Bustinduy, Iglesias, Montero, Garzon, Mayoral, Bescansa after the results of Spain's national elections in June, 2016.Jimenez Rodrigo\/Press Association. All rights reserved.Following decades of social mobilization throughout the 1990s and 2000s premised on the idea of \u201cchanging the world without taking power\u201d, through building progressive alliances in autonomous spaces, at a distance from…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1235","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1235","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1235"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1235\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1235"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1235"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1235"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nto a popular and global consciousness not only the deep and damaging social
\neffects of the economic crisis in Spain, but a considerable political and
\nregime crisis. Both mainstream political parties (PP and PSOE) and the entire
\npolitical class were duly charged with a complete inability to represent the
\npeople so mobilised (No nos representan<\/em>).
\nIn this way 15-M had the dramatic effect of reconnecting the question of
\ninstitutional change with social transformation. It aroused the desire to make
\ninstitutions work in the interest of a social majority. <\/p>\n
\nPodemos in January 2014, and its surprising success in the 25 May European elections,
\nwere seen as the long-awaited arrival of a project committed to channelling the
\ntransformative spirit of 15-M into the institutional arena. Podemos\u2019 European
\nelections program combined anti-austerity proposals with a critique of \u201cbipartisanship\u201d
\nto produce one of the most ambitious political programs it had formulated. The
\nunexpected electoral success and freshness of the message generated a wave of
\noptimism that culminated that summer with the creation of nearly 1,000 local
\nand sectorial assemblies (circulos<\/em>)
\nacross Spain. This early phase was characterized by a lack of formal
\nrepresentation, a horizontality and decentralization, which saw the assemblies
\n(some naturally developed out of the neighborhood assemblies that came out of 15-M)
\nfunctioning completely autonomously.<\/p>\n
\nend at the first state-wide assembly in Vistalegre (I) in October 2014, where
\nthe formalization of the party\u2019s structure became imperative and a choice
\nbetween models necessary. The model of the party-movement<\/em>,
\nsupported by Pablo Echenique and the anticapitalitas<\/em>,
\nproposing a more horizontal formation, was defeated in the face of a united effort
\nfrom the main leading figures around an alternative. A more centralized and
\nhierarchical proposal, supported by both Iglesias and Errej\u00f3n, built on the latter\u2019s hypothesis of the electoral war machine, <\/em>which placed the question of structure and
\nefficiency before that of internal democracy. This won out with an overwhelming
\nmajority (80.7%). Faced with a rapid sequence of local, autonomic and general
\nelections, this majoritarian current justified a more centralized structure as
\nbetter suited to maintaining consistency, and able to respond more rapidly to
\nthe complex game of electoral competition. <\/p>\n
\nfirmly set on winning the general elections, this short-term, blitzkrieg
\nstrategy of electoral assault determined a series of key decisions: embracing
\ntransversality over a more left-identifiable program of social demands; reduction
\nof politics to the electoral contest; a head-on confrontation with the Popular
\nParty and adoption of the rhetoric of war; a self-imposed insulation from social movements and the
\nattempt to bypass social conflict in proposals and programs. In short, organisational
\nand communicative verticality. <\/p>\n
\nwas the subordination of the local assemblies and other structures to the centre
\nand increasingly vocal discontent among the broader social movements in favour
\nof a more bottom-up strategy and a broader understanding of politics and social
\ntransformation. This exclusion of plurality made unfeasible the development of
\neffective counter-powers<\/em> capable of
\ncounteracting the pernicious influence of oligarchic tendencies within the party\u2019s
\norganisation (illustrating the \u201ciron law of oligarchy\u201d). <\/p>\n
\noD series on Podemos we<\/strong> looked,
\namong other things, at the resistance to this process of centralisation and
\nloss of internal democracy from both the rank and file and social movements. The
\nsense then was that the undemocratic \u201cdeal\u201d of Vistalegre I was only ever
\naccepted on the premise of a contract: handing over to the centre the strategic
\nand communication initiative in exchange for a win. But the electoral success
\nnever arrived, in 20 December 2015 or 26 June 2016. That devolution of power
\nhas yet to take place.<\/p>\nVistalegre
\nII<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nPodemos, taking place next weekend, 11 and 12 February, in Vistalegre (II). The question that this assembly puts
\non the table is that of the continuing suitability of a structure created to
\nfight in electoral wars<\/em> for the new
\npolitical cycle of both institutional, parliamentary opposition, and necessary
\nre-vitalisation and engagement with the party\u2019s base. It is also a chance for a
\ncollective reflection on the previous model\u2019s success (given its costs). There\u2019s
\na declarative consensus, from all sides of the debate, that a new model<\/em> for the new cycle is needed,
\nand that a level of internal democracy and decentralization needs to be
\nrestored. But it is hard to imagine in practice what this entails from the debates
\nso far. The interventions collected here illustrate the positions of three of
\nthe main currents in Podemos today: the sector around Iglesias, the group
\naround Errej\u00f3n and the anticapitalistas<\/em>. We have also invited contributions from the wider
\nsocial movements, such as the municipalist
\nmovement,<\/em> as their plans and their impact are often deeply felt within the
\nparty. <\/p>\nSchism<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nthe two most visible figures has recently taken on intense manifestations in
\nthe media and social networks in Spain, with both declaring the vote decisive for
\nwho will end up leading and continuing to shape the direction of the party. This
\nmay create the suspicion that Podemos\u2019 leading project has always had at least
\ntwo visions which coexisted only through a considerable effort on both sides, united
\nby the imperative of \u201cwinning\u201d alone. A recent vote on the procedures for next
\nweekend gave Iglesias\u2019 proposal a very narrow victory, indicating a split vote
\nand the open-ended nature of next weekend\u2019s proceedings. <\/p>\n
\nproposal (with less support) is that of the anticapitalistas<\/em>
\n(Podemos
\nin Movement<\/em>), whose support appears to be decisive for the success of either of the
\nother two, (although they seem much closer to Iglesias\u2019 group, if their recent
\nalliance for winning over the leadership of Podemos Madrid is anything to go
\nby.)<\/p>\nFour days of debate<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\nopenDemocracy over the following four days offer a glimpse into this key debate
\nand show what is at stake in Vistalegre II: the collective capacity to build
\nunity from within a plurality of visions; or the distinct possibility of
\nfurther division, disenfranchisement and even fragmentation. The main question
\nis: will Podemos find the right model to continue to be a determining political
\nforce for change in Spain, able to mobilise the social majority? Or will it
\nturn into an ABC that is beginning to miss some of its key letters? The membership
\nwill decide this week.<\/p>\n
\nviewpoints asks on what basis should Podemos approach the new post-electoral, political
\ncycle? <\/strong>Podemos\u2019 relation to the post-Franco \u201978 regime<\/em>. This discussion raises fundamental
\nquestions about the terrain\u00a0of the political battle, the nature of the
\nforces opposed and the forms of organisation needed. The debate is structured
\nby a series of key contrasts between the three most visible sectors (around Errej\u00f3n, around Iglesias and anticapitalistas). The key terms are: middle class vs. working class; consensus
\nvs. conflict; relying on a plural language vs. using more left-identitarian
\nmarkers; simple \u201copposition to the PP\u201d vs. \u201copposition to the \u201878 regime\u201d;
\ninstitutional work vs. social mobilisation and \u201crecovering the streets\u201d. The
\nfirst group embraces the first series of terms, while the latter two espouse the
\nsecond series of terms, but differ on the specific weight and articulation of
\nthose elements considered necessary for a successful social transformation. <\/p>\n
\ndemocratized at the upcoming party congress (Vistalegre II)? If so, how?<\/em> The week\u2019s decisions have huge implications for
\nthe way the party will be organised for years to come. Here the key debate is
\nbetween the Errej\u00f3n sector\u2019s thesis of \u201cwinning normality\u201d and the movementist<\/em> idea of opposing the
\nexceeding focus on governance and institutional management with an agenda for
\ncreating a counter-power and deepening democracy at the local level. Given the
\ndifficulty in reversing Vistalegre I, some contributions question any
\npossibility of democratizing Podemos in this week\u2019s process.<\/p>\n
\nPodemos\u2019 social base?<\/em> The very fact that
\nthis question is being asked accepts not only how detrimental the electoral war machine<\/em> was to Podemos\u2019 internal
\ndemocracy, but how isolated both leadership and the party itself became, once separated\u00a0 from its wider social base. All contributions
\nseem to agree that an expansion of the social base is necessary while they
\ndiverge over their understanding of where
\nthis expansion should be<\/em> and what are the necessary means of reaching <\/em>\u201cthose who are still
\nmissing\u201d without losing \u201cthe ones that are already there\u201d. <\/p>\n
\nor those on the progressive left, the ones to be pursued? Should the mothers
\nand the elderly, the people in the rural areas with their specific realities,
\nor those who \u201cwere once there\u201d but were driven away by a strategy of
\ncentralisation and moderation come first? Will they be won by a discourse of
\nmoderation, or by stressing the social demands that must produce antagonism and
\neven fear across the body politic? Can this social base be reached
\nsingle-handed, or only by building alliances with other transformative forces? <\/p>\n
\nthis coming Friday looks at:\u00a0What communication strategies are needed
\nfor this new, post-electoral cycle<\/em>?\u00a0Podemos has always been leading,
\nand praised for, their innovative communications developed on the basis of
\ndifferent interpretations of populism. Contributors on Friday look at the options:
\nappropriating the \u201cwinning signifiers\u201d by expressing a proposal for an open
\nidentity; reforming the media system to promote independence, pluralism,
\ntransparency, professional empowerment, community media and cooperatives; or taking
\ninto account the current limitations for the successful implementation of a
\ncommunication strategy based on an integrative diagnosis and narrative. Is any of this now even possible ?<\/p>\n
\nPedro-Cara\u00f1ana and Simona Rentea (editors) would like to thank Livia Gasparini, Katherine Garc\u00eda, Lucas Asnis,
\nLuc\u00eda Sendargorta, Sof\u00eda Blanco, Elan Pinedo, Pato McKelligang and Pedro
\nCandela for their help and support with putting together this selection.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"